The Brother Leader:
First I would like to welcome you in Libya, and thank you for responding to the invitation from the Green Auditorium. The entire world heard on March 2nd, 2005 that I had addressed an invitation to all the influential activists in the world, including professors, thinkers, students, politicians and writers to come to the Green Auditorium, which would open its doors to them to study the Green Book.
I felt that the world was in dire need of studying it, and asked the people’s congresses to set aside a special additional budget to accommodate these visitors, scholars and researchers seeking to study the Green Book, the Jamahiriy system and direct, popular democracy. This is a historic day, because this is the first meeting held in response to that appeal.
It is a meeting at the global level with people from friendly Russia, including professors, thinkers, writers and members of the Duma. This is a very important meeting, because it is held with the first vanguard of politics and thought in the world.
It is our hope that this vanguard that came from Russia will be followed by other vanguards from the U.S. Congress, the Chinese People’s Assembly, the British House of Lords and House of Commons, India and Europe. We also hope that, in addition to members of parliaments, writers, thinkers, researchers and students will come to sit in the Green Auditorium, and study the Green Book.
I believe that the solution lies in the Green Book, but the world has yet to understand it, because it has been the subject of a blackout and has been banned in most countries in the world since they know that the Green Book aims to change the world, from a world of injustice and exploitation to a world of direct, popular democracy and popular socialism. Those who hold the reins of power do not want to share it with anyone.
They ban the Green Book because it instigates those who have never had a stake in power and never participated in it. The Green Book instigates ordinary citizens, common people, the man on the street, the poor and all these great masses that are marginalized from power and wealth, and are used as cannon fodder in oppressive, exploitative societies, where they sustain themselves with the leftovers of the rich, and live off the service they provide for the those who control power and wealth. This is an unfair, unacceptable, unjust, dictatorial, exploitative and inhuman situation.
It is intolerable and unbearable for us, the simple people, the masses, the poor people who have a right to the land and a right to life. We, the overwhelming majority, do not accept this strategic, historical marginalization or this abuse.
We do not accept to be in the service of the rich and the exploiters, and protect the society of exploitation as soldiers and policemen guarding the institutions of the rich and ensuring their comfort. We do not accept to be used by the elite that have imposed itself through dictatorship as cannon fodder in wars for the sake of its capitalist, economic, imperialist interests. The simple, poor, common soldier has no interest in fighting a war outside his country. When he comes back after fighting, assuming he does come back, he has gained nothing. Rather, if he comes back, he is missing an arm, a leg, his sight, his hearing or even his mind, and sometimes he loses his life itself…
It is the ideology of oppression and exploitation that is prevailing in the world today, according to which oppressive forces, by using money, win elections and assume power, while a handful of the moneyed elite enlist this political tool in their service, and force the simple and the needy, the overwhelming majority, to suffer, endure hardships and die for their sake.
This handful of politicians and rich people attained this position by the unnatural and illegitimate means of exploitation and the use of money, money which was acquired by sucking the blood of the workers.
A rich man is only rich because there are poor people who serve him out of need, thus he becomes rich, having sucked their blood and exploited their efforts to become rich. These moneyed handfuls are to be found in every country in the world, and are the cause of the tragedy of mankind now, and of wars, terrorism, actions and reaction.
It is they who are the source of power, because a poor man cannot become president except with the backing of the rich, so that every power now is the power of money. There is no democracy at present, but there is only money which is the source of power. It is illicit money which did not accumulate in the hands of a wealthy handful because it descended on them from heaven, but was the result of exploitation.
This duo of capitalists and oppressive politicians is the cause of the woes and problems plaguing the world. At no time in history and nowhere in the world, have ordinary citizens had the readiness, the desire or the need to go to faraway places to destroy then and colonize them, but those who have financial interests are the ones who want to seize the wealth of others and the power, which is their handiwork, force those simple people out of their homes and send then faraway to enter other homes with which they have no enmity to plunder and destroy them and kill their inhabitants as has happened in every stage of colonialism experienced by mankind.
Unfortunately, we had thought that colonialism had come to an end, only to find out that it was renewing itself in a brutal manner. However, it is both positive and tragic that it is now certainly difficult to colonize the land of others, settle in it and seize its resources, because it is clearly possible now for the colonized to resist and to have access to very effective means of resistance.
The ordinary citizen is capable of packing his car with explosives and blowing it up and blowing himself up.The possibilities are now widely available thanks to the information revolution and the spread of science and knowledge, thus arms smuggling and arms trafficking are no longer under control. In the past colonialism succeeded, because it was not possible for peoples to resist fiercely as is the case now.
Back then, arms were limited and factories were owned by the invader or the colonizer, while the others were unarmed thus making them vulnerable and exposing their land to invasion, destruction and seizure. It was not. It was not possible then for the peoples to make weapons or explosives, because all these things were unknown to them.
Now, some arrogant powers do not take this transformation into account, and believe that colonialism can be affected easily as it was in the past, but colonialism now, unlike the past, is a difficult enterprise; it is short lived and cannot take root in the land of others, because those others are now capable of manufacturing weapons and explosives. Manufacturing these has become universally accessible, thanks to the internet which provides access to the state of the art sciences.
Colonialism is still practiced, but, this time, in the face of fierce resistance that was possible in the past. Such a development is, of course, tragic, as one person can blow himself up and kill scores pf people. From a humanitarian point of view, we say this is tragic, because large numbers of people are killed using modern means, but this same colonialism possesses lethal means, including nuclear bombs, and the means of destruction are now unfortunately, available for both sides.
However, the positive aspect is that it makes it difficult for the imperialists and the colonialists to seize the land of others and settle therein, but achieving this result involves great sacrifices and major losses for both sides.
The world in now in the grip of a crisis; there are demonstrations, protests, unemployment and inflation everywhere, and grievances, discontent, arrests, rebellion revolt and victims. There is virtually a world war, and no peace, stability, safety, peace of mind, or hope in the social, economic and political environment prevailing in the world now.
The world is based on the theory of colonizer and colonized, master and slave and rich and poor, and on the theory of wage, hiring, trafficking, representation, marginalization, negation and cynical disregard for the broad masses.
Thus, hundreds of millions are represented by hundreds of individuals, which is regrettable, ridiculous and futile. For instance, we find a country of 300 million people with a parliament of three hundred members, which is laughable, unfortunate and problematic. The three hundred million have realized that the three hundred representatives do not express their desires, share their dreams, or represent them, and, hence, bypassed them and declared that representation is a fraud.
It is fraudulent to bring three hundred people and claim that they are the three hundred million; the three hundred representatives only represent themselves, and cannot dream for the millions or share their desires and their feelings.
Therefore, representation failed and the peoples have gone beyond it, thus, the people and the representatives are not on the same page. There may be a parliament which claims that it was elected, and it is possible that the election, in few cases, was not rigged, but the peoples have given up on parliaments and representatives, and we see them out on the streets expressing their demands directly.
This is proof that the representatives have failed to speak for these peoples. When some governments decided to go to war against Iraq, millions demonstrated against the war. What does this mean? It means that the representatives did not express the demands of these peoples that had elected them, because if they had spoken for the peoples and shared their wishes and dreams, they would have opposed the war.
Therefore, representation is a fraud, which means that scores of peoples are ruled by dictatorial regimes, and are not represented by parliaments, because these parliaments approved the dispatch of forces. How can the parliament approve when the people do not?
Hence, the parliament does not represent the people, representation is a fraud, and mediation, representation and parliaments must be abolished. This farce must be placed in the museum as an ancient relic, because peoples can rule themselves. But how can a people of hundred of millions rule themselves?
We are accustomed to a government consisting of twenty, fifteen or ten ministers who govern, and a parliament consisting of scores of people or hundreds of people sitting in a chamber that accommodates scores of people or hundreds of people who decide for the people .But how can the people rule themselves by themselves?
How can the people, men and women, sit in session and rule themselves by themselves? Naturally, the short –sighted view would say that that is impossible, and settle for representation, with a few people representing millions. This view is erroneous, as it views democracy as a matter of distance and size of chambers, but that is not the way to view it.
Wherever the people are found, whether in the neighborhood or the village, they convene in people’s congresses in which all adults, men and women, participate and decide what they want. Then, if the entire people decided to declare war against a state , then that war would be legitimate, because the people felt that war was inevitable with that neighboring state or a state that is separated from it by an ocean and continents, although that would be highly unlikely.
If a law was passed, it would be passed by the people, the adult men and women sitting in session. Then, if you were sentenced to death under that law, that law would be sacred, because it was passed by all the people, who felt that such a crime should be punishable by death, and you yourself were among those who deliberated and eventually decided that the perpetrator of such a crime deserves the death punishment.
So, you would willingly submit to the punishment, because you took part in drafting the law, and were convinced of it, because it would not be fair for you to submit to such a punishment under a law passed by others. Those others may be called a parliament, a government, a revolutionary council or what you will. Such a law that you had no hand in, you would not obey, not only in regard to capital punishment but even in paying a fine, imprisonment or arrest…
This defect in the social, economic and political structures in the world today has precipitated the crisis besetting the world at present, and produced the rulers who brag, fabricate and distort the truth to justify their rule and their unjust policies. This policy is of no use to the peoples and the world and cannot solve problems.
When a reaction occurs, the people would say: “This reaction against us was by a person for whom we caused a problem”.
However, the ruler would not only transgress against another, but would not admit his error. Such fraud and deception does not serve the people, peace, mankind or even those who espouse such logic. Since the social, economic and political structures are based on error, so all actions are taken to justify this error, which breeds injustice, exploitation and dictatorship. Peoples do not rule themselves and there are no Jamahiriya and no popular socialism, because all social relations are based on injustice and exploitation.
Peoples are ruled by proxy, and laws are not passed by the people, but by someone else in the name of the people, which is a sham. The wealth of the earth belongs to all the inhabitants of the earth, and the wealth of every country belongs equally to all the people of that country.
But this is not the case, because power and wealth are controlled by a handful which only attained its position by crooked means. Therefore, whatever policies are pursued is only designed to justify this fallacy.
We, the common citizens, hear astounding things from governments and politicians; they tell us that black is white, and white is black. What we see as black they say is white, and we are expected to accept such distortion. This is amazing! The truth is that if you say: “
This is white not black,” then you are a rogue, a deviant and wrong. They tell you, “We said that it is black, and you say that it is white, which means that you disagreed with us, and whoever disagrees with us is a rogue and insane.” This is a falsehood and a fallacy which is prevailing in the world today as a result of the marginalization of the peoples from wealth and power.
If it was the peoples who passed laws, made decisions and crafted policies, the world would be a world of peace, equanimity, stability, love and cooperation, because peoples do not hate each other and seek peace and stability . No people would leave their land to occupy the land of another people.
An army that leaves its country to occupy other countries is made up of needy people drafted by an unjust authority which is the product of the wealth owned by a handful of exploiters, who made the politicians, who drafted the needy to form an army, and ordered them to go and die outside their land, and if they come back, they are missing a leg, an arm, their eyesight or their hearing.
This is happening in the world today. If those soldiers, who left their land to occupy and destroy another land, had stayed home as ordinary people they would not have had the desire to cross their borders and commit such heinous acts, but orders and need forced them to become soldiers for the politicians and the exploiters, and as long as they were soldiers, they would be given orders to die and colonize.
Thus, in the world today, a blackout in imposed on the Green Book. They say: “The Green Book is a dangerous book written by Algathafi, whereas in actual fact the Green Book was not written by Algathafi, but by the history of mankind.”
The Green Book is the lessons learned from our history as human beings; it is an analysis of all the facts of our past life, both sweet and bitter. The Green Book states, “Such and such a problem occurred, because things were not handled this way; handle them this way and there will be no problem.” Why were people unhappy in the past? We have found out that he who is not free cannot be happy.
We have found out that he who is need cannot be free. Therefore, freedom lies in need, and in freedom lies happiness. You will not be happy unless you are free. We found out in the past that people were not happy, because they were not free, and they were not free, because they were in need.
For people to be happy, they must be free, and to be free they must not be in need, according to the Green Book. It is the history of mankind which says that on the basis of lessons learned. Humanity, which says this, authored the Green Book.
Now, thank God, the Green Book and the ideas of the Green Book may have launched the Third Universal Theory, which is beginning to be heard and studied in the age of the internet, satellites and the information revolution. Nobody, no matter how hostile to humanity and the Green Book, can stop the ideas of the Green Book from spreading, and they will spread despite those who do not want that.
The Green Book and its ideas will be diffused over the internet and through all the modern mass media all over the world. Now, in Russia, in the Duma, professors and friendly writers have organized societies for the Friends of the Green Book, which shows that the Green Book is beginning to reach America. Some say that a country like Libya with a small population is suited to the Jamahiriy system.
On the contrary, a small state does not need the Green Book, the Jamahiriy system, and people’s power as much as the big state. The greater the population of a state, the more it needs the Jamahiriy system. If we take China as an example, it is inconceivable for a single individual or entity to rule this empire.
Also, one in Beijing cannot know the problems of people all over China, and no government, no matter how sincere, intelligent and concerned with the people’s interests, can manage the affairs of the population of China. This is not possible, because the representatives, who will be in the hundreds, cannot represent people in the billions.
We were in the process of answering the question regarding the manner in which the people can rule themselves by themselves. It is the government that rules and the representatives who rule, but how can the people rule?
We have said that the people rule themselves not by bringing them to a single chamber, which is a very superficial view. The people stay wherever they are, and convene people’s congresses, where they decide whatever they want.
These congresses, unlike assemblies, include all the population without exception. There is a difference between assemblies and congresses; assemblies are elected by the people, but the congresses comprise all the people, leaving no one outside them.
These congresses form people’s committees, which implement the decisions of the congresses. This is self – management. Thus, no law is passed unless endorsed by all the people. It is not proposed by the government or the parliament.
They, if present, have the right to make proposals, but every ordinary citizen who has an idea for a law is entitled to propose it to the entire people. If the people endorse the law, it goes into effect. However, in view of the prevailing injustice, the ordinary citizen is marginalized, and cannot propose an idea for a law in his country.
Who would listen to a citizen in India, who says, “I have a wonderful idea for a law.”? No one would, because this is not considered within his competence. Why? Because that citizen has been robbed of his will, and even his dignity, for the sake of the representative. Since you have elected a representative for you, then you are a member of a constituency represented by him, and he proposes the laws.
Then can one as an ordinary citizen contact this representative? No, that is impossible, because your relation with him and been completely severed the day you placed that ballot in the ballot box. He became a representative and you became an ordinary citizen robbed of everything it is the representatives who are entitled to propose or pass laws. Then, the millions who make up the people, the entire nation, do not have this right and are marginalized.
Al long as the nation is marginalized and has no right; thin what’s the need for this whole process, including the representation, the government and all these mechanisms?
This shows the invalidity of these mechanisms and structures extant in the whole world. It is impetrative to sweep away the representatives, the rulers, the classes and the parties, and leave the people to rule themselves by themselves. Partisanship Itself is an obsolete tool among the classical structures that cannot stand the challenges and the requirements of the modern age.
All the criteria and the structures in use now are obsolete; the flow, the demands, the requirements and the challenges of the masses are too great for partisan structures, which are museum pieces. If the dialogue continues with you, Russian friends, members of the Duma, professors, writers and journalists, it will be possible to begin thinking of convincing the people in Russia, for example.
In this regard, would like to answer a question asked by a friend whether it would be possible to establish a Jamahiriya with out violence. We do not need any violence at all; we only need persuasion.
If, through your efforts, together with other groups, the Russian people were convinced that power must be the prerogative of the people through the people’s congresses and the people’s committees, there will be direct transition from the republic to the Jamahiriya, from injustice and dictatorship to direct popular democracy without having to go through certain stages.
The Marxist Leninist theory, the ideas of Marx and Angles, are utopian ideas which, if applied, would have created an earthly paradise However, because they are utopian, they did not succeed. That is a lost paradise which we would have wished to attain, but we did not achieve communism.
We have an image of communism, but we have never seen it, because it is a long process, and we have to go through the national phase followed by the socialist stage under the slogan” He who does not work does not eat. “Then from socialism we go through several stages until we reach communism, when the slogan becomes”
To each according to his need, and from each according to his ability. “When would that be achieved?
When production accumulates, property becomes communal, and even the proletariat disappears, and the whole people becomes one class.
This would have been beautiful had it been achieved, but it was not, because we got tired before reaching it. Communism was not achieved, because there is a defect in the theory.
What is to be done? The lesson learned is that if there is a possibility to skip stages, it should be seized. For instance, in Russia, through the active members of the Duma, the professors, the students and the intellectuals, we can quietly teach the Green Book and distribute it.
When that takes place, there will be a transition in Russia from the current situation to the status of the direct Popular, Democratic Jamahiriya. It is certain that the whole world will adopt the Jamahiriya system one day. We are now only going through a phase but everything in the world is moving forward, and as long as this is the case, the world will certainly reach the Jamahiriya without violence, which we do not need at all.
Some people think that since the Green Book is the work of Algathafi, it must involve violence and the use of weapons, which reflects ignorance of the Green Book. They should read the Green Book. I hear some attributing certain statements erroneously to the Green Book.
They say that the Green Book states that the Koran must be the Sharia of society, but this is not in the Green Book at all. It speaks of the sacred law in any society and says that it is customs and religion, which means the mores and the traditions which enjoy consensus and respect.
If a society believes in any religion, be it the religion of Buddha, Muhammad or Jesus, then that is a fixed, unchangeable law. Every people have their own mores and traditions which can only be changed through social evolution and not by decree. People have always agreed on certain rules of behavior, which are the genuine, fixed Sharia that cannot be changed by the parliament or the government.
They represent a belief in something which is not necessarily the Koran; it is the Koran only for Moslems. When we speak of Moslems, we say that the Koran is Sharia because it is the Sharia for all those who believe in Islam, and those who believe in the Bible, the Torah, Buddha, Zoroaster or Confucius hold these beliefs sacred and unchangeable, and this is Sharia.
As for the constitution and such, that can be called a law, because the parliament may meet tomorrow and change the constitution, as constitutions can be changed at any time in any country in the world. However, we cannot trust nor have faith in something that can be changed by a handful of people meeting in a room like this, but we trust and have faith in something that can only be changed through evolution.
The Green Book says that your Sharia is the Koran if you are a Moslem, but if you are not a Moslem then your Sharia is based on your holy book Every nation has its own Koran; one calls it the Bible and another calls it the Torah, so each one gives it a name. Such statements are attributed wrongly to the Green Book I t must be translated accurately, since I have seen confusion in some of the translation. For instance, I saw in the English version the word ‘participation’, which is not the right word, since it is not a matter of participation with the people. The people have no partner.
When the Green Book is translated in this manner; the meaning differs from the meaning in Arabic. I have said that this meeting or this day is a historic occasion, because it marks the first response to the global appeal I launched on the 2nd of February of this year, when I asked nations to come to the Green Auditorium to study the Green Book. .
Our aim was not to serve the interest of Libya at all, but rather to resolve the present crisis of humanity. It was the elimination of the societies of injustice and exploitation, of colonialism, terrorism, arms, dictatorship, poverty and exploitative capitalism.
We wanted to treat our sick world body, purge it of disease and create it anew. That was the aim of inviting all the peoples to come to the Green Auditorium; it was in the interest of t hose peoples and of mankind. Those who are hostile to the Green Book or the Green Auditorium are sick with the disease of racism, chauvinism and narcissism. Isn’t this human thought?
If you study it and find it useful, why don’t you embrace it? Every thinker, philosopher, analyst or prophet in the world belonged to us all. We study them, quote them and benefit from their ideas, and if we excluded them, we would be petty and racist.
Then why should one reject the Green Book? Read it, study it and then judge it. The ideas of Angels, Smith, Bakunin, Montesquieu, Rousseau and Tolstoy belong to the world. When we reject the ideas of Ibn Hayyan, Avecine, and Al-Razi, we would be depriving the world of astronomy, mathematics, marine science and medicine.
The ideas of Avicine in medicine have benefited all of mankind. Had they rejected the ideas of Avicine because he was a Moslem and oriental, the world would have been deprived of these great benefits, every drug is called ‘medicine’. How do they say it in Russian? ‘Ibn Cina’
A member of the audience:” Ibn Cina”
The Brother Leader: Go any where in the world you will find that this ‘cine’ must be a reference to Avicine. Therefore the contribution of Avicine to medicine belongs to the whole world. Had he been rejected out of prejudice, ignorance and narrow – mindedness, we would have been deprived of medicine, which would have still been in its infancy.
If we had fought the ideas of Jabber Ibn Hayyan, Al-Idrisi and Abu Bakr Al-Razi, we would have been deprived of many sciences from which the world is benefiting now. Algebra was developed by Jabber Ibn Hayyan, medicine was developed by Avicine.and astronomy and marine sciences were developed by oriental Moslem scientists.
If we had been prejudiced and said this one is oriental and that one is a Moslem. We would have been now deprived from astronomy, medicine and many of the sciences, from which we benefit now.
By the same token, if we had said that electricity and the telephone were developed by Western Christians we would have been prejudiced and would have hurt ourselves. So, the person who developed electricity was not a Moslem, yet, as Moslems, we benefit from it, and the person who developed medicine was not a Christian and yet Christians benefit from it. This also applies to the Green Book.
Whoever fights the Green Book is sick, petty and needs psychotherapy. They wonder how come such ideas can emerge from Libya. Such hatred is pathological. If you have a political dispute with Libya, that is something else, but, as the famous Greek historian, Herodotus, said, “From Libya comes the new…”
Then, brothers pay attention! Perhaps the new still comes from Libya. If you happen to have a dispute with Libya over a gulf, a sea, oil or borders, that is something else, but don’t say:
“If a book comes out of Libya, I will not read it.” Now, if the rulers of the Western countries were to come to the Green Auditorium and study the Green Book they would contribute with us to resolving the global crisis and curing the world from its sickness. .
I actually gave up some of the time of my afternoon nap for this meeting, in view of the importance of this delegation, and because it was the first delegation to respond to the global appeal which I launched on the 3rd of February this year. I wanted this to be an encouragement and a model for other nations to come as this vanguard came from Russia. Thank you very much and hope to meet you again.
Dr. Rajab Abou Dabbous: “First, I would tile to thank you for addressing us. I would like, as a footnote, to refer to one of those who have stated that the Green Book possesses a destructive power. A professor in the Sorbonne, Edmond Joffi, said in his book entitled “Algathafi: My Vision”,
“Al-Ghathafi gave up the atomic bomb and nuclear weapons, because are not viable, but he has a much more potent weapon which does not destroy buildings but destroys the old order. Therefore the old order will be hostile to him.”
The Brother Leader: “While listening to Haikal, I heard him refer to subtle force and brute force, and say that subtle force, culture and thought, will triumph. But bombs and steel will be defeated. It is the Green Book is actually the subtle force which will triumph.
Dr. Rajab Abou Dabbous:” Brother Leader, some comrades have some souvenirs they want to present to you.
The Brother Leader: “Please go ahead.”
Intervention: “This is the emblem of the Russian Federation; a double-headed eagle and the victorious knight…”
Intervention: “I am from the Republic of Azerbaijan. The leader of Azerbaijan visited you seven you. There have been some changes in the Republic. I would like to give you this book to see those changes. I would like to tell you that the leader always has a great, difficult job because it is extremely difficult to manage social and political relations. But peoples understand each other much more quickly through culture.
I would like to give you the music of the Caucasian peoples. Since thee can be no music without dancing, I want to give you these pictures of this national dance troupe (several pictures)
The Brother Leader: “When the delegation visited me, they visited the house that America destroyed, so they gave me a house in the Republic of Azerbaijan.”
Intervention: Muammar, Leader of the revolution, I am speaking on behalf of a working group in the Russian Parliament. This group is studying the problem of democracy in the modern world. We know your book very well, and respect the ideas included in it, and your ideas and achievements in this regard…
We would like to express our great acknowledgement, and to present you with the symbols of our national culture. This is a symbol of our culture; it is an expression of Russian fertility and procreation and sufficiency in life. We wish you courage, steadfastness and continuous victories, and prosperity for your dear people.
Intervention: Honorable Leader, today you have spoken a lot of the casualties of war, and the suffering of peoples and soldiers in these wars. It so happens I have worked in all the hot areas in the world over the last twelve years. After this I published a book about the people who fight these wars and their lives. This book may help us know and understand what is happening in the world.
Intervention: Honorable Leader, 22 years ago, a friend of mine introduced me to the Green Book. Since then, I have been dreaming of this meeting. On behalf of the revolutionary movements in Russia and in Moscow, I would like to present you with this book about the Russian Parliament and the media. I would like you to sign a copy of this book, and we are waiting impatiently for the Russian edition of this book.
Names of the brothers in attendance:
1- Dr Rajab Abou Dabbous: Chairman of the Board and Director General of the Academy of Jamahiriy Thought, and the Director General of the Green Auditorium.
2- Oleg Schmolin: PhD: First Deputy of the Chairman of the Education and Science Committee in the Duma, Chairman of the Council of the Labor Party_ The Communist Party Bloc.
3- Sergey Babof: Member of the Group of Five, Member of the Constitutional Drafting and State Building Committee- Independent.
4- Alexander Krevobokov: Editorial Director of the ‘Sun ‘Newspaper, Moscow.
5- David Kartiban: Assistant to a representative in the Duma.
6- Vadim Kozmin: The Legislative for the Region of Leningrad, a historian and a journalist, PhD in history.
7- Michael Pachinko: MA in history, Pushkin University of Leningrad
8- Dimity Gantev : Professor of African Studies, Professor in the Asia –Africa Institute of the State University of Moscow, and the Institute of Orientalism of the Russian Academy of Science.
9- Faseeh Badrkhan: PhD in History, Member of the Political Club (School of the Integrated Analysis for Russian Political Experts), and works in the Institute of the Russian Academy of Science.
10- Natalia Romanov: Professor of History in the Orientalism Institute of the Russian Academy of Science and the Asia –Africa Institute in the State University of Moscow.
11- Askar Bey Edgovrev- Professor of Philosophy in the Maicob Technical University
12- Loop Brickbat: Philosophy Professor in the Education and Teachers College in Siberia, Writer in the ‘Sun’ newspaper.
13- Ajor Churchenko: Member of the United Russia Bloc; Member of the Russian North and Far East Issues in the Duma; Member of the Central Council of the United Russia Party.
14- Valentina Sanoa Setyanova: The Homeland Bloc, Member of the Labor and Social Affairs Committee in the Duma, Member of the Russian Life Party.
15- Kim Ahmad Koshev: Vice-Chairman of the Society for Solidarity and Cooperation with the Peoples of Africa and Asia, Assistant in the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Federation Council.
16- Gregory Plachkin: MA , Political Science, Specializes in Following the Panorama of the Duma
17- Vladislav Shborkin; Deputy Editor – in – Chief of the ‘Zavetra’ newspaper, Member of the Union of Russian Writers.
18- Victor Alexisnis; the Homeland Bloc; Member of the Natural Resources Committee in the Duma, Vice –Chairman of the Homeland Party. :
19- Valerie Kovalenko; Philosophy Professor; Chairman of the Department of Russian and World Policy in the State University of Moscow.