today there was a very important meeting with the leadership of the armed forces of the russian federation, which was held by the minister of defense, general of the army giroy of russia sergey kozhegitovich shoigu listen to the analysis, if the systematization of the experience of our groups in ukraine of personnel and

plans for the supply of military equipment improvement of combat training. we will continue to develop the nuclear triad and maintain its combat readiness, since the nuclear shield has been and remains the main guarantor sovereignty and territorial integrity of our state. we will also increase the combat capabilities of the aerospace forces in terms of the operation of fighters and bombers in the area of ​​​​operation of modern air defense systems and the happiness of improving unmanned aerial vehicles. our immediate plans to expand the arsenal of modern shock weapons is an equally important task in the shortest possible time to work equipment and tactical equipment of personnel to the highest level. everything a fighter needs to be modern comfortable and reliable. we

need to improve the communication management system. for these purposes, we will actively use artificial intelligence technologies, in the near future we will have to modernize the work of military commissariats. it is necessary to digitize databases and establish interaction with local regional authorities, as well as industry. update the system of organization of civil and territorial defense. we will also improve the mechanisms for responding to civil initiatives, separately, of which certainly deserves more attention. solving these and other tasks will make it possible to build up the combat capabilities of the armed forces and ensure the deterrence of aggression against russia . this shows what we are taking into account. what is the army? analyzes experience, does not try to practice.

the ministry of defense hears the voices of the fighter and has created all the necessary mechanisms to ensure that information reaches the industry as quickly as possible. and what is being developed in the industry, as quickly as possible, turned out to be at the front; such an example, i will give a conversation with guys who sew the uniform. i ask why are you like this? well, as if the coloring is unusual for us, not our usual pixels, they say, the army asked the army. she said that it is more convenient for them to fight in this particular way. and now 150,000 sets of ideal new equipment for special operations forces are being tested. i come to the guys from the desk and talk about it. you know, this is the

perfect camouflage for us, because it works 10 months out of 12, so rain. that is, it means that they heard the people from below and immediately embodies. that is, here we impose our own rules. and for the west there are no rules against us to crush us. they have violated their own so -called democratic principles a hundred times already. now it’s not even clear what it’s like to be shouted down, that ukraine should receive all the necessary weapons, even those that some western politicians didn’t want to talk about a few months ago, leaving their autographs on beans and tanks with pleasure. here's how, for example, this half-wit from the czech republic peter fiala. moreover, the vulgarity is that he signs on one of the tanks, well, the soviet period of improvements. that is, this is how it should be betrayed, after all, this fascist past. it is how many of us tried to

invent a history of anti-fascism for them, but nevertheless, the true hari appear as a brave defender of ukraine, he writes yes. the brave defenders of real ukraine are fighting the second corps in the days. r lnr. here they protect the real ukraine from the nazi sailor, who captured this thieves' country. and so they rejoice, they want to kill russian soldiers they believe that this is right and necessary, as some idiot from finland stated, in addition to weapons, ideology is used, total russophobia is instilled not only in europeans, but also in our scum coward and fugitives of the main goal, no one will hide this destruction of russian statehood by all possible means . i really liked viktorovich what you wrote about the fact that we must break approaches and stereotypes. i was surprised when i started a discussion with the respected senator klim. to be honest, i didn't understand.

and what exactly angered mr. senator, because when one of the fathers of the constitutional law said that everyone must abide by the constitution, i would like to remind you that we have only recently made an amendment to the constitution based on wartime . if necessary, i want to remind you that we are not for the constitution. laws for us, they must correspond to real time. today i spoke with very respected people. there are eminent experts in the field of law and they speak in particular. here is the question, which is, and the frontline zone. which the right should act if you talk to people at the front for them to solve problems. rather, you need to return to the steam room during the great patriotic war to change the rules of them. , you know, just like me, what needs to be done

for victory, you need to win, win, relying on our unshakable values ​​of the idea of ​​good and evil, understanding who opposes us, while clearly realizing that this is not easy, if if you want a civilizational task - this is the question of the rules. to be honest, i was very surprised by the reaction that this mine caused. in general, in my opinion, a completely trivial post about the fact that do not play with a cheater, because you will lose. you never make rules. well, this logic is known. i just translated it into the language of today and was a little surprised that it was tied up, it turns out from the constitution that when i say, you don’t have to speak according to the rules, then i understandably mean the rules that are imposed on us from the outside, but not the rules that we make for ourselves. the constitution must be violated,

the law of course not. and so in itself this idea is very trivial. moreover, i will tell you that it is not the first time in history that we ourselves have come across this idea. we have already solved it, and in a purely legal way. i was writing a dissertation on the theory of proletarian socialist internationalism, which in the 1960s in the west was called the brezhnev doctrine. and the meaning was very simple. we talked about making rules international, we said that we adhere to the rules that are fixed. the un charter in those treaties and conventions that we support adopt for example, we are already members of the international civil aviation organization in 1970 and kao is called, i didn’t start on purpose before the broadcast, i looked at the motivation that we

gave ourselves when joining this organization very interesting there motivation is mainly due to the fact that we accept these rules, which uh hmm both adheres to from the organization in order to ensure for themselves the unimpeded use of our civil aviation on the territory of those countries that are members of the organization. hello from today . it means that today, after the well-known events began, it means that after all, the known rules of this organization, which we continue to remain, have cut down all kinds of flights through a number of european countries, this means that we are, as it were, part of this large community, but it is not a fact that they will offer us exactly the rules according to which we it’s convenient to live today like this, i return to this idea, and we then told the entire world community and the most amazing thing is that it

was accepted by default that inside the councils of mutual economic assistance within the world socialist system. inside the warsaw pact. in addition to international law , the principle of socialist internationalism operates, which also implies the first, second, third, fourth, fifth. and it was precisely our then understanding of the rules by which we play. and which ones we don't play, because it contradicts our interesting rules and why we can’t deprive the scum of russian citizenship, and there is a direct ban in the constitution which is about what the constitution directly says here, as if without any reservations. stop it says directly that you can’t deprive russian citizenship, but in the constitution i specifically studied this issue, i was interested in specialists that this form is from the constitution that a person can return there without

hindrance . there is an article in the constitution i do not understand another. well that's what says i hate your russia take away your passport. and we tell him, no, dear, if he voluntarily leaves, there is such a procedure, another matter. well, let's go, i'll explain now. and if he de facto took a second citizenship, this is inadequately not the same as he is not forbidden from us to have a second civil, he has the right. now now we are not banned. this is clearly a kiss, to whom we were handing out passports back. and what did bandera and their support in soviet times, who were selected, then they returned and some people were worthy, and a number of samples were put. no. so, just what i wanted to do, i just really don’t understand, so people are telling us to spit on your country. we get citizenship of other countries. our elections are good, but the war has begun. they are fighting on neither side. i don’t wake up every morning, which means that even or even money, they wear different uniforms, then

our nato one. i just want to, uh, this idea , uh, to emphasize, you know, it was very correctly said that this is what should determine the legal system is that within the country and the rules of the international order. it is clear that we can play according to the rules that are imposed on us and that are really quite often violated there, well, countless countless times. but we proceed from our legal systems that the external situation is the situation in which the country finds itself. it does not affect the legal system. we should not change the legal system to suit the situation. straight in my opinion. this is how we should act and in this sense. for example, i am a supporter of touching the constitution. how can more carefully, and even more so, we recently introduced a large number of people there, held a referendum very little, touched, as if the article that belongs to whom the article we are talking about refers to the head of the second

constitution, which cannot be changed by decisions. the federation council thinks it can only be changed by a referendum and a decision of the constitutional assembly. so you think now we will hold a referendum, and deprivation. citizenship return of the death penalty 20 properly supports yet such a tactless question. i had it all the time, but these are the parts that cannot be changed. and what moses brought. it’s not mine that the shakhrai stone was engraved on the tablets, so we say directly that these are people who are sitting to say vladimir vladimirovich for a second. i proposed, in full accordance with the constitution, to suspend the right of entry by court order. and then it hit me. it means that i call there, almost to uh, you all got out on me. yes, yes, yes means the overthrow of the foundations, e state

system. well my friends. well, really if we turn to the people and ask, but those characters who today say that they are going to turn russia into radioactive ashes and have russian citizens. we correctly i correctly understand that according to the current legislation. this citizen. tomorrow he will come to the border and show his russian passport, they will let him into the country, and so they come here. here , everything that he said will come out on the arbat , there he will bring a single peckiet, and then he will go bang, which means a glass of champagne for the victory is up, and we will now talk about the tv show. yes and we’ll also launch it on a tv show, because, after all, for the sake of democracy, everyone must give the floor to a certain danya melokhin, they brought him to a corporate party and sold it. yes, in this case, i'm talking about those characters who have not arrested my eyes at the border for a long time. no, everything is fine. i'm talking about this. so, get things going. that is, they say. of course, you all return,

because you know, yes, i think, not a hooligan, but to call a spade a spade in this case, the traitors are born. uh, as i understand it, a criminal case has been opened in relations with malinin not for this not hooliganism, but definitely this act, which falls under such articles as undermining the constitutional order, well, lawyers would better tell you how it looks in other words, my friends, i imagine the situation as follows, that today the time has come when we need and completely subordinate foreign policy and domestic policy to those tasks that are worth more when you say that we are going to change the rules. i want to draw your attention. what they generally say, like, i'm wrong. but i think what is not, generally speaking, the main goal of ours, in addition to what is said in ukraine, of course, in addition to the fact that genocification is directorialization and so on, what concerns ukraine. but the most

important thing is that this task is to change the world, the world that led to today's conflict in ukraine, it is inherently conflicting for us, it creates a situation where we are constantly under the threat of an external enemy . about this i i said i don't understand it at all. and when i hear, gentleman, zorkin or citizen, that is, a trap. i just don't really understand what he's talking about, he gives norms that are all remarkably related to time, which has nothing to do with today . he is a wonderful legislator. i treat the constitution with tremendous respect, but you are orthodox people, i am jews. yes, you lived orthodox non-catholics with us, what is the pope or what? what kind of

topic do we have in general, that is, this cannot be discuss, it is impossible to discuss, so that it seems to me much easier. find a solution without touching the constitution it is. why there are a million opportunities to solve any problem is not well spelled out in the constitution. no , of course not. and if the constitution is not spelled out, then what, it turns out, is a kind of gray area, i think that if it can be undermined under some norms of the constitution, there is no violation of the constitution, as you know, since the decree was a signed decision. not the bible of the constitution does not close all questions of the constitution - it is alive. some certain substance that must correspond to the aspirations of the people at a certain historical stage and should provide the legislative basis for the prosperity and survival of the country. they should also serve as an obstacle when speech suddenly begins to juggle with certain articles of the constitution, a basic question arises about the letter or the spirit of the spirit. what that

existed in russia. and if the constitution begins to work in the interests of people who hate russia when some institutions interpret, let's put it mildly. i still remain at my point of view, which is quite possible today there is a consensus on the legislator the duma council of the federation to find a legislative solution to all those issues that are related to today's challenge, that's right, that's why i'm just going to you you understand perfectly well in irkutsk and in the donbass what we will do with the constitution court investigation 9 months. moreover , by a court decision, it is necessary to draw the constitution that the draft is written, of course, there is the possibility of martial law, which give that and then it should be written into the law it should, but it is not actually spelled out in martial law that we have injuries.

of course not, but it doesn't. we don't have compliance. that's good. but this is just in time for the question that let's now correct the current legislation for the tasks that we are facing. or maybe i will ask such a question in general, to which, probably, there is no answer. but when our rocket hit the mobile phone in the hands of mr. dudaev this is a terrible decision of the constitution and if, when it turns out that today in special services textbooks describe the story of the poisoning of mr. khatab, an international tourist. that's it. it's like, in my opinion. this is an absolutely legal action, falling under the norms of wartime. and i will put it more simply, the fact that daria dugina is not avenged is not a violation of the constitution. well, together it is not constitutional. so to speak, justice must be kept justice on the go find and execute. and where is it with us

? front. eh, the question turns out. if the sniper that is, every sniper needs to be imprisoned. look at them, how many he killed, or something, criminal cases initiate an order. what order quietly, you understand the constitution of direct action. there's also a no kill order lower than the constitution yes they are it, sorry i think constitutional law experts who share your point of view. i will find there a million explanations that this absolutely fits into the constitution of course, of course, in this case much, so pavel is quiet, when i said that we a direct action constitution because he knows i'm right. he therefore understood that it was quite difficult here. but i'm what it is, listen, the west wants to destroy us. yes , the west does not care about everyone, therefore, to subordinate to the solution of this task the opposition to the destruction of us from the west, all other actions. they say you want to expand by starting to work off their fifth column. and we

say, sorry, we can't have a sherrochka with a car, a circus. beckon. vladimir , it still seems to me that our general mentality is changing in this regard. here are the people. uh, for sure, people know for sure, people will tear at once. i would question in this situation that happened around me now go. yes, i see what i'm saying, you're right. you are great, of course. therefore, here we are, if we want to change the world around us we need to change the world inside us, that is, we need to systematize the file correctly, firstly, can i once, a very long time ago acted as a lawyer valery dmitry chizorkina and great respect for i relate to him. i wanted him to be a lawyer, you know, yes, he has a humanist the other is the greatest humanist. he is a brilliant specialist, he is right, he has a lot on this subject. there are publications of books and he reveals his position, therefore he acts

in the conditions that exist today and are prescribed in the constitution, if they change, then naturally we will act according to the constitution that we will accept , you understand, the countries did not just say that they are the greatest humanists , well, are engaged in humanitarian. they just have to lead such relationships with great respect, no question. just sorry some thirsty human blood. it is possible as in russia, the opportunity is in the blood, perhaps anything can happen with us, by the way, the most humane will be confirmed by colleagues of the constitution was stalin's pre-war most democratic and made it possible to win the war in those conditions. and you offer from it again not to offer. i propose to follow the proposal of oleg viktorovich morozov. i read, of course, brilliant reasoning, i absolutely agree that there are no rules of the game , there can be no negotiations with the west for a long time, because the conditions. here it is very correct that oleg remembered that in soviet times we practically

did not enter into any conventions of the act in the soviet union, like in tsarist russia. and if he joined, then with collusions about socialist internationalism and so on . everything that we were trained for 30 years from pedestal to pedestal , and chewing gum, then jeans, then visas. yes , we are now free in the forest, then there are rockets. yes, let's change the potential threat. well, in reality, we sawed our rockets with americans who are not dialogues and the people have cheap hoppniks. no, no, the constitution is in this constitution had a very simple liberal ideology, of course, in principle. remember the fifteenth article yes of the norm under international law. you say, so ask away, and what is his international law? no, for 30 years we have been taught that this is international law, international law, in fact, in essence. what kind of chelation is this? yes, i don't keep talking. i'm talking about international law, which does not exist today. where it is where it is it all this is the right of the west over

all the rest. look at how the thesis of the rule of law is being used now very beautiful theses in american it sounds, and the supremacy on the right of which american and western european course. here it is. what kind of supremacy on the right today and ours have been taught over these 30 years. what does independence mean independence, this is authoritarianism independence, this is the isolation of traditional values. not tolerance yes , it means there, but any step towards independence was perceived as a challenge to the progressive world of the progressive world. in what way is he progressive in killing an old , sickly disabled man through humane euthanasia? what do you need? yes? what is progressive today in this world that is being imposed on us, and so on, that russia needs to be dismembered, because our fifth column, which is not threatened by anything, and which continues to receive here, and the fact that we do not answer this

in any way, because we we still say no. well, we don't interfere inside the country. it's impossible. they, therefore, are our months, and all this is progressively expressed in the fact that they are endless and for a very long time they are fighting orthodoxy, because orthodoxy, of course, is the most steadfast religion is the most persistent faith that did not die in the roman persecution in the fire of the european revolutions, the bolshevik repressions, and they are fighting, again, i remember ruskin. well, he’s not a fool, he blurts out and says, destroy russia, like an oblot of orthodoxy, it is only due to this that everything orthodox around russia who fights with this is the same people who fought with the great victory, of course, the same one and the same , of course, the two pillars on which our society rests, the great victory and the monotheistic religion. in principle, what we get, that is, we are the great christian, the great islamic side, what we get, who do we see the finished scum of the sobchak family, who scoffed at

orthodoxy, scoffed at the great victory. we see the bastard venedict. we see all this shobla of rain, and what will it be, is it really them, as lukashenka would say. i breastfed my left breast, they say, my intelligentsia, who are an alien, 21, which, by the way, was transmitted by it people. sorry, now they do n’t feel well, by the way, the west is long time is struggling with islam and analyzing it in every possible way throwing in the thesis. that is , terrorism is still weak. yes, that is, they are fighting, in fact, they are fighting god with god, and therefore, it seems to me, today we need to remember those principles that have enabled us to survive for centuries, they are very simple. yes, russia is ruled by god the best allies and the army fleet the soul of god in the life of the fatherland to the fatherland, to whom it seems to me, if we not only remember this, but every young person in the education system and education that today requires. a cardinal restructuring well, a cardinal, well,

my friends, the year of the military operation is coming, that we introduced once a week a conversation is important, well, well, on mondays we raise the flag and sing hymns, we must completely rebuild seven education so that the fundamental idea of ​​which will line up all the subjects and the enlightenment system education was one idea. great russia literature. geography. history should not humiliate a student today at school, talking about darkness, but illiteracy in russia, yes, of course, to the yeltsin center. this everything was drunkenness from the position here video. tell me about the great travels of scientists under her ownership. only then will modern young people see the future of great russia, which objects to the constitution , volodya said at least something, you are now acting on a sore spot on ideology. i think that we are generally formulated. constitutions write say anything at all.

dmitry in this brilliant book written by colleagues have been talking about this for many years. tell me, what are we talking about now with our west. what kind of hadith we are the tide of the world when we turn on we see on tv a mediocre show for billions that are made, which simply ridicule patriotism, feeling the people who are fighting at the front today, calling them losers. close they will give you the entertainment industry from the cinema to television rebuilt, which is the state of money for ours with you. only you, when you go to close one of them. they will quietly tell you and the kiss will stop very simply i want to answer. we don't have biology. on what basis are you complaining to us? how are you ? i was called here by one obscurantist there, well yes, also called homebuilding. no, it's

hard for me. like this. yes, i believe that the two actions should be able to cope with each other, supporting the consultation of society and the concentration of power. moreover, the higher the concentration of power, the better will be the consolidation of society, which dmitry anatolyevich writes, all these false forms are gone. well , he straightens out some ideas, but before that it is correctly clear that there is a war with nato, which means that wartime will come from this. and this should be everywhere, everything must be built as it is. and that's all the people understand everything. the people are clear, is it clear? as i understand it, why dima does not get out of the donbass, not only because he is the motherland, because he has no stupid questions. everything is clear there. it's clear? why doesn't pasha get out of there. well, everything is clear there, there, everything is extremely clear and you don’t know any doubt, they themselves say, it’s easier for us. it's hard for you in moscow, so many government officials

think they're going there. people are not for everyone at all, of course, they discovered for themselves that here is the people i serve. there everything is limiting clearly here. you start talking you look and all sorts of wise men all something here. here you just want. of course, they do not understand that no one will look for any good russians. the west sets the task of our total destruction of any good we will ever have. not under any circumstances, no matter what we do, and no matter what we say, and when we don’t give in, yes, and when there are respected people whom i have known for many years, they suddenly giggle through their lips, but i have acquaintances, who would go on mobilization. i have no fools no, this is what i said about this, that how can one allow is this the person talking? the father you remember.