en

Ronald Thomas West

Ronald Thomas West
Wed, 04 May 2022 17:58:07 +0000

Kill Switches & Knuckleheads


How common sense is concealed as a state secret:

kill switch
noun
a computer function for disabling software or a device remotely: 100 percent of the French high-tech arms exports concealed a kill switch which could render the weapon useless

"Senior MPs have called for an inquiry into claims that France deliberately withheld secrets about missiles that killed 46 British sailors in the 1982 Falklands War

"The Telegraph has been told that French-made Exocet guided missiles contained a "kill switch" that could have disarmed them, but that France denied such a device existed

"Three Royal Navy ships were hit by Exocets during the Falklands conflict, two of which – HMS Sheffield and the merchant vessel Atlantic Conveyor – sank. Sailors died on all three ships

"The missiles were made by the French firm Aerospatiale and, as the Royal Navy task force sailed south to retake the islands from their Argentinian occupiers, Britain appealed to its ally for information about how they worked and whether they could be disabled

"British experts believed the Exocets contained a kill switch, which arms manufacturers sometimes secretly build into weapons so they can be disabled if they fall into the hands of a hostile state

"According to a highly-placed source, France denied that the kill switches existed, but British officials became convinced it was not telling the truth, partly as a result of investigations carried out on an earlier variant of the missile that had been bought by the UK"

knucklehead |ˈnəkəlˌhed |
noun informal
a stupid person

"Serbia plans to purchase Rafale multipurpose fighter jets from France, President Aleksandar Vucic said  … which experts saw as the latest sign of Belgrade distancing itself from its traditional military supplier and ally Russia

""We have been negotiating this purchase of 12 new jets for a year, and we are also looking at buying another 12 used (Western) planes from another country," Vucic told Reuters. He did not specify the type of the used planes.

"Serbia and Dassault Aviation discussed the purchase of the 12 Dassault Rafale jets, France's La Tribune weekly reported last week

"In 2019 Serbia bought France's Mistral surface-to-air missiles and in 2016 it acquired helicopters from Airbus

"Croatia, which is an EU and NATO member and Serbia's wartime foe from the 1990s, also operates Rafale jets"

Right. So, Serbia will be 'BFF' with Croatia & NATO and, never a worry shall arise that, when a Croatian/NATO Rafale fighter jet takes on a Serbian Rafale fighter jet, the Croatian/NATO plane will be, in every case, 'a winner by Dassault' .. er, excuse me, I meant winner by default (it's the kill switch for the knucklehead with a short attention span)

So, about those Mistral missiles Serbia purchased which likely won't touch a NATO jet; Serbia is arming up with systems that will (maybe) work against a single entity and that entity would be Russia.

And then, the preceding brings up the countless shoulder launched anti-tank & anti-aircraft missiles abandoned on the field of battle in Ukraine by Kiev's forces as though they were useless as the NATO states pour thousands of new man-portable missile systems into the conflict and suddenly the Russians get serious about taking out the NATO supply lines. Did a Russian 'hack' driven software change become necessary?

A plausible WWIII footnote would be, if the French made Exocet of 1982 possessed a 'kill switch' and it almost certainly did, it stands to reason nearly every subsequent high-tech generation weapons system would be adapted to this 'furtive' technology, no matter the geo-political alignment of the manufacturer. Example given, should Russia be concerned about the S-400 system it sold to Turkey in case of hostilities with the double-dealing & back-stabbing Turkish President Erdogan? Probably not.

*

Ronald Thomas West
Wed, 20 Apr 2022 18:44:01 +0000

Empire Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow


From Mel Brooks 'Space Balls'

Cultural Myopia or New Study Challenges The Beginning Of Civilization

"Following the transition from foraging to farming, hierarchical societies and, eventually, tax-levying states have emerged. These states played a crucial role in economic development by providing protection, law and order, which eventually enabled industrialization and the unprecedented welfare enjoyed today in many countries"

Yep. In short other words, rich nations versus poor nations.

"Only where the climate and geography favored cereals, was hierarchy likely to develop. Our data shows that the greater the productivity advantage of cereals over tubers, the greater the likelihood of hierarchy emerging"

The lowly sweet potato, turnip, beet, carrot -these stayed in the ground until time for preparation and consumption- none of which led to the 'hierarchy' crucial to the rise of civilization where people like Elon Musk dream of leaving a 'hierarchical development' called a trashed Earth behind (with all of its' poor, doomed schmucks abandoned by the elites once enough stupid people have been sacrificed to sort the technical aspect.) They 'hope' for 'escape' before the war-mongers weapons sales propping up billionaires bring on World War III (noting if weapons sales were halted tomorrow, the Western economies would collapse.)

"We challenge the conventional productivity theory, contending that it was not an increase in food production that led to complex hierarchies and states, but rather the transition to reliance on appropriable cereal grains that facilitate taxation by the emerging elite. When it became possible to appropriate crops, a taxing elite emerged, and this led to the state"

Yep again. In short other words (again) when the theft of foodstuffs became an option, this enabled the sociopath rise to rule.

"Suitability of highly productive roots and tubers is in fact a curse of plenty, which prevented the emergence of states and impeded economic development"

Right. In effect, this "curse of plenty" amounted to a 'pre-civilized' clean environment without means of mass destruction, no oligarchs, no 1%, no world wars, and no need to escape a trashed planet (an escape that is little more than a fantasy in any case.)

"The extension of the empire has meant the growth of private fortunes. This is nothing new, indeed it is in keeping with the most ancient history" -Gaius Asinius Gallus (from Tacitus, The Annals of Imperial Rome)

Don't miss this one: Loos In Space

Ronald Thomas West
Fri, 01 Apr 2022 00:01:22 +0000

April Fools at the Pentagon Bible Study


* Jesus Loves Nukes *

The once upon a time, hardened nuclear command mega-bunker, built inside of Cheyenne Mountain, outside of Colorado Springs, USA, drove the adversarial intelligence agencies crazy. So, what was up with that?

The nuclear command and control system had been moved out of the mountain and onto exposed ground where it was vulnerable to first strike. WTF?? was the reaction of those pesky Russkies, it not only baffled them but the Chinks too… oh, and a few allies and the domestic front. What secret new system, world mayhem, Satanic DARPA project, might be taking shape in this vacated NORAD space? (a reasonable question.)

NOT TO WORRY asserted our Christian Taliban Air Force generals; the Pentagon and Saint Augustine have our back, oh and by way of explanation for those secular infidels, you see, it's all a command and control redundancy; we need two systems, one exposed so, if or when we miss our 'first strike' at the ball and the exposed system gets blown away, there is no problem (they sent this excuse out on Radio Liberty.)

^ "You're telling me 30% of our military want 8 billion people to die?" "The answer is affirmative"

Meanwhile, at the Pentagon Bible Study:

Question: "Is the 'just' in Saint Augustine's 'just war theory' an adverb rather than the widely assumed adjective?"

Answer: "It's easy to correct the misconstrued interpretation, for the fact our righteous Augustine was a Roman, it can only be 'just' the adverb."

Who Would Jesus Bomb?

At our next lesson, we'll have a look at how we'll be lodging the Air Force Academy leadership of the '144,000 Chosen', here's a quick preview:

^ Our repurposed Cheyenne Mountain

Nah. Nothing were ever so simple as an apocalyptic military doomsday cult needed a bit of NORAD's 'survival' space, you think? APRIL FOOL! (for all incapable of wrapping their heads around the point of this 'satire')

The longer read:

It Is NATO's Nazis in Ukraine: It's Not Rocket Science

Ronald Thomas West
Tue, 08 Mar 2022 10:02:29 +0000

Women’s Day in Donbass


By Erwan Castel

Women at the heart of the battles

Seen from the Donbass

Today March 8 is celebrated Women's Day, and allow the heart of this burning topicality this message of love and admiration for those who are in my eyes in the heart of human storms the high guardians of Life, Traditions and Human Hope.

Calling Women "the weaker sex" is certainly one of the worst nonsense conveyed by this Western monotheistic phallocracy which has infected European mentalities despite a few exceptions (which confirm the rule) such as the Marian cult and the myth of Joan of Arc for example .

Often relegated in the history of Western wars to a passive or ignored role, women on the contrary turn out to be combatants in their own right, and more! because their feminine and maternal dimension gives them the symbolic power of what Man fights for until the supreme sacrifice, for his sanctuary and his freedom!

Since I arrived in the Donbass, the women I met in the bombarded neighborhoods or in the trenches have not only impressed me with their natural elegance but above all with their courage and their love for this black land too often reddened with the blood of its children, and I understand why the Greek myths at the origin of this founding myth often situate the people of the Amazons on these northern shores of the Black Sea where for eight years the daughters of the Novorossiya have resuscitated their legend with a bravery that has never not to be ashamed of that of their elders of the Red Army having already risen only 3 generations ago against the madness of Nazism.

The land of Novorossiya cradle of the legendary Amazons
Hercules against the Amazons, Greek vase 6th century BC

If war is often considered as a "men's affair", we must not however neglect the place of women in the military history of peoples… On the contrary because the Woman is not only the living symbol of the forbidden sanctuary, mother, companion or daughter of the warrior, but also proves to be an essential participant in the war effort. And when we look closely at revolts, revolutions and wars, not only do we see women there, but many of them play a decisive and symbolic role in the writing in letters of blood of the heroic pages of a human adventure, unfortunately painful.

In 2014, when the war fell on the Donbass, there were many mothers, sisters and daughters who from Donetsk and Lugansk went to pick up a weapon, a first aid kit, a bag of ammunition and food and carry themselves, unblinking to the Ukrainian armored madness destroying their homes.

Ilona Bonevich, callsign "Bonja" in 2014, this woman commands a unit special, injured in the fire, twice decorated… with the group of Commander Givi and a workforce of only 120 militiamen, she will defend the city of Iliovaïsk, attacked  by several Ukrainian armored battalions supported by shelling. Faced with the fierce resistance of this handful of lovers of their land, the enemy, vexed, ended up beating a retreat, estimating their forces… at 3,500 men! Workers, nurses, paramedics, messengers, but also combatants, these women of honor are often present in the turmoil, from the back of the front to the heart of the battles, and their actions have nothing to envy to the courage and the heroism of their brothers in arms alongside whom are  courageously defended the values, traditions and freedoms of a people of Europe threatened for 8 years by an ethnocentric and genocidal dictatorship under the orders of a foreign power.

And at a time when the towns of the People's Republic of Lugansk, Severodonetsk and Lisichansk are about to be finally liberated by the republican forces supported by the "north wind", my thoughts go out to these teenagers of the "Battalion of the young self-defense" who, in August 2014 sacrificed themselves to allow the militias to escape the encirclement and retreat to a front line that they will hold until today:


This teenager had volunteered with her classmates to defend  their city of Lisichansk in August 2014: 72 young people, and without military training, aged 16 to 18, of whom 24 girls had trained the "Young Self-Defense Battalion". They will achieve the unthinkable: resist for 2 days against 2000 Ukrainian soldiers supported by armor and artillery. 18 of them will die for their land including this heroic young girl, many others will be injured and some will even manage to escape the encirclement and join the ranks of the Luhansk militia. Eternal memory for these heroes!

Today the women of Donbass, like their Palestinian, Syrian,  Yemeni, Armenian, Kurdish sisters… are in their fidelity to the past a universal example for the future of the peoples, of their dignity and freedom.

Indeed, since the dawn of time, the Woman has been in the front line to defend this hearth that she embodies even in her womb, and thus to enter the heroic legend of nations: from the Egyptian Ahhotep, to Geneviève de Galard, the angel of Dien Bien Phu, via Zenobie the Syrian, Bodicea the Celtic, Hangaku Gozen the Japanese, Joan of Arc the French, Anne Bonny the English, Animatou de Zaria the African, Calamity Jane the American, Phûlan Devî, the Indian, Sophie Magdalena Scholl the German, Laskarina Bouboulina the Greek, Rosa Luxembourg, Louise Michel, Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier; Lucie Aubrac, Marie, Dolores, Anne, Françoise, Greta and so many other known or unknown fighters but so numerous in history that there would be a lack of

But here, in this Donbass at war, I admit that women are exceptionally courageous, selfless and sacrifice for their country and their people, resisting with incredible resilience 8 years of war and genocidal bombardments.

Perhaps they are also carried – and certainly – by this heritage of Slavic women in general and Russian women in particular, who engaged massively alongside men during the wars of their History and in particular in the 20th century when complete units were even consecrated, such as the "death battalion" and its 2000 volunteers deployed on the German-Russian front during the First World War.

But it was especially during the Great Patriotic War from 1941 to 1945 that, responding to the principle of Marxist-Leninist equality of equal citizenship, thousands of Russian women enlisted from 1941 in the ranks of the regular Red Army. but also in those of the partisans. These women enlisted as auxiliaries of course, but also tankers, snipers, airwomen, and they were more than 1 million to fight on the Russian front to defend the Motherland, that is 8% of the total troops engaged during the conflict!

Today the girls of Novorossiya have proved that they are worthy of the mythical amazons or the heroic fighters of the Red Army; defending with exemplary courage the land of their ancestors and their children!

Some smiles have faded but their eyes continue to shine in the sky of our memories:

On this day of March 8, I address my admiration to all the women who are the true heart of men and in particular to those who are at the heart of the fights led for their land of which they are the eternal guardians!

I wanted to offer all these girls, sisters, companions, mothers and "babouchkas" of Novorossiya, this tribute, but I realize with sadness that my words are only the miserable echo of the admiration I have for their courage. and their dignity… So I withdraw, letting my heart send them in silence my eternal gratitude for the noble example they offer us…

Erwan Castel

"What we fight for is worth more than our lives!" -Alexander Zakharchenko, 1st President of the Donetsk People's Republic

 
Wounded Amazon by Franz von Stuck, 1903.
Ronald Thomas West
Thu, 03 Mar 2022 11:38:48 +0000

Ukraine & The Nazi Meme


This open source analysis begins with Italian investigative journalist Gian Micalessin's interview of the snipers who were present at the 2014 massacre of protestors & police in Kiev's Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location. CIA owned (via google) youtube makes you sign in (registers your identity) to watch parts one & two. Here is the English translation of the interview with the snipers. The NATO history of septic infection by Nazis begins below that.

After four years from the beginning at November 2013 of Maidan demonstrations, we are able to tell another truth, completely different from the official story. Our story begins towards the end of summer 2017, in Skopye, the capital of Macedonia. There, after long and complex negotiations, we met with Koba Nergadze and Kvarateskelia Zalogy, two Georgian participants and witnesses in the tragic shootings and massacre.

Both Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili , who started, in August 2008, a short but bloody war with Russia's Vladimir Putin. Nergadze, as proved by an identification card he holds, was a member of a security service at President Saakashvili's order. Zalogy is a former Saakashvili party activist.

"I decided to come to Skopije to tell you everything we know, about what happened … and I and my friend have decided together, we need to shed some light on those facts," Nergadze says.

Nargadze also says Alexander Revazishvilli, [we met] a few months later, a former sniper of the Georgian army, participated in the Maidan shootout. [We] met in another Eastern European country.

All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents.

"The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement," Zalogy said. "The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the" Pink Revolution "that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the "Pink Revolution"

Alexander's version is no different. "Mamuka first asked me if I was really a trained sniper, Alexander recalls, [then] he immediately told me he needed me in Kiev to pick some places."

Our informants integrated to various groups of volunteers between November 2013 and January 2014, [after] receiving passports with false names, and money advances.

"We left on January 15, and on the plane, Zalogy remembers, I received my passport and another [passport] with my photo but with different name and surname. Then they gave us each a thousand dollars to begin, promising to give another five thousand more"

Once in Kiev, our three participants begin to understand better why they were recruited. "Our task, Alexander explains, was to arrange provocations to push the police to charge the crowd. Until the middle of February, however, there were not many weapons around. The Molotovs, the shields and the sticks were used to the maximum."

But in mid-February, clashes around Maidan begin to get worse. "About 15 and 16 February," Nergadze remembers, "the situation has begun to become more serious every day. It was out of control now. And in the meantime, the first shots were heard. "With the rising of tensions, new players [would] come into play"

"One day around February 15, remembers Alexander, Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American soldier." The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili.

"We were always in touch with this Bryan, Nergadze explains, he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions"

The first suspects in the possession of firearms among the ranks of demonstrators, involve Serghey Pashinsky, a leader of Maidan Square, who became, after the fall of Yanukovych, chairman of the Kiev parliament.

On February 18, in a video made that day, a rifle locked in a car was recorded with video taken by a demonstrator, showing an automatic rifle. A few seconds after, Pashinsky approaches and orders the car be allowed to go. The next day, weapons were distributed to groups of Georgian and Lithuanian mercenaries residing in Hotel Ukraine, the hotel overlooking the square used as a headquarters by opposition.

"In those days, Pashinsky and three other people, including Parasyuk, had taken the weapons handbags to the hotel. They were going to get them into my room," Nergadze says.

Volodymyr Parasyuk is one of the leaders of the Maidan Square protest. After the massacre of demonstrators, he will become famous for an ultimatum in which he will threaten to use weapons to hunt President Viktor Yanukovych.

"On February 18, recalls Zalogy, someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them."

"In each bag, recalls Nergadze, there were Makarov's pistols, Akm automatics, carbines. And there were packages of cartridges. When I first saw them I did not understand …. When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. "What's going on," I told him, "what are these weapons? Is everything all right?

"Koba, things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting," he replied, "we can not go to the pre-election presidential elections …" "But who should we shoot? And where? "I asked him." He replied that where he did not care, we had to shoot somewhere … to sow some chaos."

"While Nergadze and Zalogy assisted in arms distribution at the hotel, Alexander Revazishvilli and other volunteers went to the Conservatory, another building overlooking the square. "It was February 16th … Pashinsky ordered us to collect our belongings and bring them in … Other people arrived, they were almost all masked.

"From their cases I understood … they carried weapons …. They pulled them out and handed them over to the various groups. Only Pashinsky was talking … "He was giving orders. He asked me where we were supposed to shoot. " "In the meantime, explained Nergadze, even at the Ukraine hotel, the leaders of the revolt underlined the purpose of using the weapons.

"They explained to us to shoot to create chaos and confusion. We did not have to stop. It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or a molotov. The important thing was to sow chaos. "

On the 20th, in the morning, the plan came into action. "It was supposed to be dawn," Zalogy remembers, "when I heard the sound of the shots … they were not bursts, they were single strokes … came from the next room. At that same time, the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired one shot while the other closed the window. They have fired three or four times everywhere."

Alexander, admitting he was involved in the shootout from the Conservatory building, claims to have understood very little. "Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. We did not have much choice. We were ordered to shoot both the Berkut, the police, and the demonstrators, no matter what. I was totally outraged. It went on for fifteen minutes … maybe twenty. I was out of my mind, agitated, under stress, I did not understand anything. Then suddenly, after 15, 20 minutes the shooting ceased and everyone has put down the weapons. "

As wounded and dead arrived in the Ukrainian Hotel's reception, the snipers fled from the rooms. And so the victims found themselves next to their assassins.

"Inside, recalls Nergadze, "there was chaos, you did not understand who was who. People ran back and forth. Someone was hurt … someone was armed. Outside was even worse. There were so many injured in the streets. And the many dead."

Alexander says he left in a hurry. "Someone was shouting that there were snipers, I knew what they were talking about," he said, "my only thought was to disappear before they knew about me. Otherwise, they had me. At that time, however, I did not realize, but now I understand. I do understand. We've been used. Used and discarded."

Note: Polish European Member of Parliament, Janusz Korwin-Mikke, independently confirms CIA trained snipers presence at Maidan:

Tidings Article Headline: Korwin-​Mikke: snajperzy z Majdanu byli szkoleni w Polsce [translates Korwin-Mikke: snipers at Maidan were trained in Poland]

_

Tidings Magazine: "Pan jest zwolennikiem tezy, że to była operacja CIA?" [Your thesis is this was a CIA Operation?]

Korwin-Mikke: "Majdan to była również nasza operacja. Snajperzy byli szkoleni także w Polsce" [Maidan was also our operation. The snipers were trained in Poland.]

Where It All Begins

Who are the nazi-American shadow government players? We begin with looking into what Mark Gorton calls "The Enterprise"…

"The tools of the cabal include domestic [and foreign] death squads, political prisoners, Orwellian control of the media, domestic spying and domestic (and international) terrorist attacks. The cabal has partnered with some of the worst people on earth including, Nazis, drug dealers, terrorists, the mafia, cults, mass murderers, child molesters and pedophiles" 

…and comparing it to what Jeff Sharlet describes as ongoing in "The Family"…

"One needn't be a Marxist to find fault with the Family's mash-up of New Testament and unfettered capitalism — Adam Smith himself would have recognized that theology as a disingenuous form of self-interest by proxy. Such interests have led the Family into some strange alliances over the years. Seduced by the Indonesian dictator Suharto's militant anti-communism, they described the murder of hundreds of thousands that brought him to power as a "spiritual revolution," and sent delegations of congressmen and oil executives to pray to Jesus with the Muslim leader. In Africa, they anointed the Somali killer Siad Barre as God's man and sent Sen. Grassley and a defense contractor as emissaries. Barre described himself as a "Koranic Marxist," but he agreed to pray to Grassley's American Christ in return for American military aid, which he then used to wreak a biblical terror on his nation. It has not yet recovered"

…followed on with with a comparison to Wayne Madsen's research…

"By 1957, ICL [International Christian Leadership, a 'Family' corporate euphemism or front] had established 125 groups in 100 cities, with 16 groups in Washington, DC alone. Around the world, it had set up another 125 groups in Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Northern Ireland, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Lebanon, Ethiopia (where Emperor Haile Selassie gave ICL property in Addis Ababa to build its African headquarters), India, South Vietnam, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, Guatemala, Cuba, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Bermuda. ICL's international activities coincided with activities in countries where the CIA was particularly active – an obvious by-product of the close cooperation between [founder Abraham] Vereide and the CIA's Allen Dulles and James Jesus Angleton. Angleton and his close associate, Miles Copeland, favored using private businessmen to conduct operations that the CIA was barred from conducting statutorily [lawfully.] The ICL fit the bill very nicely"

…these preceding are clearly the same organization. Whether you call them affiliates or fronts, the 'Enterprise', The International Christian Leadership (ICL), The Navigators (farther on, keep reading) and The Family amount to a single talent pool from which cells ('Enterprise/Secret Team') are built, along the line of intelligence agency organizations. Former CIA Director GHW Bush, although it did not originate with him, was at the nexus of welding this pseudo religious crime organization into the USA government over decades, where it has consequently spread throughout the NATO hierarchy (and elsewhere) via the USA military. This is what former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, L Fletcher Prouty, was writing about 50 years ago with his description of 'The Secret Team'

"For all its fabrication and apparent unreality, especially in this open society, the ST [Secret Team] machine does have a central soul or brain… or perhaps… holy spirit. It is the evidence of a form of new religion. It has its secrets. It has its divine and unquestioned rights and obligations. It has self-righteous power over life and death. It does not believe in anything. It does not value anything. It is utterly ruthless"

When George H.W. Bush had become the 'clandestine operations' executive officer (replaced Allen Dulles), it was Vereide's heir, Doug Coe, had become the 'theocracy' co-captain (with Richard Halverson) who delegated authority and 'blessed' GHW Bush into the driver seat not long after the death of Abraham Vereide (d.1969.) Preceding Bush having consolidated control over the 'executive action' arm in 1970 (with Coe's 'blessing', like a mafia godfather) Allen Dulles (d.1969) had been the previous undisputed clandestine operations 'executive officer' of this 'Christian mafia.' Dulles had been a WWI military intelligence officer, a Nazi sympathizing traitor throughout WWII, ran the CIA over the majority of the Opus Dei (Vatican) 'rat line' years (cooperating with Opus Dei rescuing Nazi war criminals from justice) and was ultimately responsible for subverting the CIA, the operations sector particularly, into a tool of 'The Family' which had itself been organized into cells on intelligence agency model.

"A lot of their key men in a country would be the intelligence officers in the American embassy. Throughout their correspondence, that's the kind of guy they would like to have involved. They always had a lot of Army intelligence guys involved, Pentagon guys"

Via the Department of State, and its Siamese twin the Central Intelligence Agency, and Pentagon officers in NATO and military attache assignments to embassies, over 70+ years, this septic infection has spread throughout the Western world and beyond.

On The American Domestic Front

[Trump mentor Roy] "Cohn's job was to run the little boys. Say you had an admiral, a general, a congressman, who did not want to go along with the program. Cohn's job was to set them up, then they would go along"

Now, to the Epstein issue. Almost no one knows the intelligence agencies have a designer drug that both; breaks down the will and super-enhances sexual acts via a distorted sense of time (not only heightened sensuality.) Most blackmail targets who'd been unwittingly drugged wouldn't care in the moment of sex with underage kids provided to them, even if they knew they were being recorded. Think Homer's Odyssey and the sirens where Odysseus was tied to the mast of his ship and his crews' ears plugged with beeswax. Only the USA's ship of state (and ultimately, the NATO nations and more) had no captain the equal of Odysseus and no beeswax for its crew. The only question (in my thinking) is who has recordings of who.

"he asked a young man who'd put himself, body and soul, under the Family's authority, "Let's say I hear you raped three little girls. What would I think of you?" The man guessed that Coe would probably think that he was a monster. "No," answered Coe, "I wouldn't." Why? Because, as a member of the Family, he's among what Family leaders refer to as the "new chosen." If you're chosen, the normal rules don't apply"

Just suppose 'the family' were an embedded phenomena in the several NATO nations' intelligence agencies, this next (former spook) may have come close but didn't win a cigar (it's not only Mossad, his own CIA has the longer history and a track record of illegally compromising Americans; not to mention its complicity in GLADIO)

"Selective inquiries into wrongdoing to include intense finger pointing are the name of the game in Washington, and the affaire Epstein also has all the hallmarks of a major espionage case, possibly tied to Israel. Unless Epstein is an extremely sick pedophile who enjoys watching films of other men screwing twelve-year-old girls the whole filming procedure smacks of a sophisticated intelligence service compiling material to blackmail prominent politicians and other public figures. Those blackmailed would undoubtedly in most cases cooperate with the foreign government involved to avoid a major scandal. It is called recruiting "agents of influence." That is how intelligence agencies work and it is what they do"

Meanwhile, over at the Pentagon…

"Due to DCIS [Defense Criminal Investigative Service] headquarters' direction and other DCIS investigative priorities, this investigation is cancelled"

The upshot? After A FURTHER DECADE of inaction, it is LITERALLY taking a proposed Act of Congress to attempt shutting the Department of Defense child porn network down:

"The END Network Abuse Act would require the Pentagon to enter into agreements with groups including law enforcement, child protection services, social services, and trauma-informed healthcare providers in order to cut down or halt the spread and impact of these images on DOD networks. The bill would also upgrade the training and technical expertise of the military organizations involved in investigating these types of crimes.

"The National Criminal Justice Training Center, one of the groups that has thrown its weight behind the bill, reported in 2018 that DOD's network was ranked 19th out of almost 3,000 nationwide networks on the amount of peer-to-peer child pornography sharing"

So, another big question: How is it our "Christian Taliban" coordinating with a suddenly 'out of the closet' (CIA paramilitary operations) dominionist cast at CIA…

"Weinstein told TYT his group has received complaints from CIA personnel about Pompeo's introduction of overtly religious behavior into the workplace, including Rapture references. "He is intolerant of anyone who isn't a fundamentalist Christian," Weinstein said. "The people that worked under him at the CIA that came to us were never confused—they never had time to be confused. They were shocked and then they were scared shitless""

…are rubbing shoulders with a bunch of little kid f**kers at the Pentagon in their special operations joint efforts, you know, all of that super Christian (Gott Mit Uns) culture represented in the USA military forces "Officers Christian Fellowship" and their Pentagon prayer groups in an organization professing…

"… create a spiritually transformed U.S. military with Ambassadors for Christ in uniform empowered by the Holy Spirit …"

…and multiple coordinated intelligence agencies (Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Central Intelligence Agency) with all of their professional 'penetration' capacities can't clean this shit up?

Pentagon_Christians - 1

Huh. Maybe there's something to the adage "Nothing fails like prayer." Certainly the balls to stand up this seem to be altogether AWOL or the ethics & morality at the Pentagon (especially) is in a state of DESERTION and praying 'Oh Jesus, save us' is not going to cut the evil out.

The NSA is run by the Department of Defense, as well the Pentagon owning the Defense Intelligence Agency, together with any idea the Department of Defense cannot solve this problem with exposure of the criminal element, is patently absurd. Nothing short of complicity at the top could keep the little kid f**k circus in business. Who is compromised at the top? Well, it goes to the top on both 'parties' part.

"Doug Coe is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God" Hillary Clinton

"You know Jesus said 'You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that's what they taught the kids. Mao ["Gang of Four" actually] even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn't murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom" Doug Coe

Who was Doug Coe? (d. February 2017.) The spiritual guru of not only Hillary but also MIKE PENCE. It was Mike Pence attended the meeting where Donald Trump was introduced to Doug Coe

Coe meets Pence - 1

"Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953 has spoken at the breakfast, a point made at the meeting to Trump by the evangelical lay minister Douglas Coe, a leader in The Fellowship religious organization, according to Coons. Also attending the meeting with Trump was Boozman, Vice President-elect Mike Pence, and several of Trump's faith advisers"

Here is Doug Coe in his own words, the spitting cobra speaks for himself:

Beginning at minute 5:30 of the above video:

"Jesus said you have to put me before other people. And you have to put me before yourself. Hitler, that was a demand to be in the Nazi Party. You have to put the Nazi Party and its objectives ahead of your own life, and ahead of other people"

Coe goes on to say:

"I've seen pictures of the young men in the Red Guard… They would bring in this young man's mother. He would take an axe and cut her head off. They have to put the purposes of the Red Guard ahead of their father, mother, brother, sister, and their own life. That was a covenant. A pledge. That's what Jesus said"

And then:

"If you're going to have any movement that moves men and nations, you have to have that kind of commitment"

Yep. Pence and Hillary's guru stated you need make a commitment to following the principles, and emulating the behaviors of, some of history's more infamous mass murderers, to move their 'Christian' agenda forward. If you keep listening, it doesn't get any better.

Who are the 'Navigators' Pence's long time spiritual guru had been addressing? An elite right-wing (actually Nazi) international Christian proselytizing organization with a 100 million dollar (+) annual budget. Probably it should come as no surprise the Navigator organization Coe preached to has for its registered symbol a neo-Nazi cross that also features in the Klu Klux Klan decor kit:

Coe-Navigator - 1

"Each part of The Wheel® Illustration represents a crucially important component of a vibrant Christian life"

Compared to the contemporary neo-nazi decor at duck-duck-go:

Navigator_Circle - 1

Is Zelensky a case of the 'Anti-Semites Who Loved Jews…And the Jews Who (Sometimes) Loved Them Back' ?

Spengler love? - 1

Maybe. Historically speaking, there's nothing unique in Zelensky's relationship to Ukraine's fascists and in this case the bad marriage is just another cell of an exclusive 'serial-killers only' swingers' club where everybody is tired of the limited opportunity at couplings, yet their sex (murder) addiction requires everyone screwing everyone out of habit and everyone hates everyone's guts. At some point, this ever-expanding (NATO) crew will resort to new mass murders, such as the ongoing false-flag massacre in Ukraine's Mariupol, consistent with an American 'Monroe Doctrine' past:

"These cells operated, as many of the Family's projects do, through God – "the Catholic generals and colonels who rotated coup by coup through the leadership of Brazil, Guatemala, El Salvador … consented to the Protestant ministrations of the Fellowship in return for access to American congressmen"

Now, to the present day Catholic Church Nazis the theologian David Berger had blown the whistle on:

Self-supressed Catholic priests - 1

"Hitler was praised for having interned and murdered homosexuals in concentration camps

"the Vatican is .. relying increasingly on reactionary troops. It is closing ranks with evangelists, bible fundamentals and extremely reactionary forces"

This last, preceding quote, bring us to Mario Bergoglio's meeting with Doug Coe:

Coe meets Pope - 1

At the end of the day, Nazi-pedophilia enabled blackmail seems evident in every direction; 'The Family' (in association with the Church at Rome) will have opportunity through the Catholic church, particularly via the 'Eastern Rite' Catholics of Western Ukraine's Galicia.

Dominionism's Fingers in Kiev

There is a very interesting blurb from the official White House website:

"our office launched the first-ever Interagency Working Group on Religion and Global Affairs (RGA), co-chaired by the [White House] Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships and the White House National Security Staff.  This groundbreaking working developed a comprehensive map of how our government currently engages religious actors in foreign affairs through USAID Missions, Embassies, and Departments across government from the Department of Defense to the Department of Health and Human Services"

This is a pretty blanket admission religion plays a role throughout the USA government, despite the American foundational law erecting 'a wall of separation between church and state.' It is no news to me the White House (and American government generally) trashes this principle of law, and that is not the particular focus of today's 'revelation.' Let's narrow the preceding quote:

"co-chaired by the [White House] Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships and the White House National Security Staff"

Ok, so now we've reduced this to a White House endeavor or effort on behalf of 'religion' and 'national security.' Never mind just how creepy that sounds, when contrasted to religion in history from ancient to modern time, the associated role of empires, and the countless dead in too many wars to count. Rather lets look at another aspect of the quote in relation to modern USA foreign policy:

"a comprehensive map of how our government currently engages religious actors in foreign affairs through USAID Missions, Embassies, and Departments across government"

Particularly noting 'engages religious actors' & 'USAID' & 'Embassies', and noting the 'embassies' recalls the fact of Department of State is a CIA Siamese twin, and USAID is a CIA cover program, one need not wonder for long how it came to be Voice of America (CIA radio) notes Ukrainian Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the Greek Catholic Church was in attendance at a so-called 'National Prayer Breakfast'…

"It was a great possibility, not only to represent Ukraine, but also make connections, meet people and transmit truth about Ukraine and the situation in Ukraine"

As previously noted in my article 'Victoria Nuland's Wedding with Christian al-Qaida', the Voice of America (CIA) states the so-called 'National Prayer Breakfast' attended by the Arch Bishop Major of Kiev is sponsored by 'The Family' or that is the 'Christian Dominion' element which has penetrated every aspect of American government. The three pillars of the Christian Dominion movement in the USA are:

  • Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe the United States once was, and should again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.
  • Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.
  • Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, believing that the Ten Commandments, or "biblical law," should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles.

And again to Ukraine and Ukrainian Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH at Kiev:

2 June 2014 "The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Patriarch Sviatoslav Shevchuk and head of the [schismatic, unrecognized by larger Orthodoxy] Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate) as well as government representatives and opposition leaders will attend today the [Family] National Prayer Breakfast, a traditional event held in Washington"

Arch_Bishop_Major

Answers to Rome

 The Pope at Rome considers all Christians, regardless of denomination, to be in communion with the Catholic church, no matter how 'imperfect.' The Orthodox church does not, however, recognize the Pope's authority. Roman Catholicism is dominionist by deed and history to present time, example of present day dominionism in Spain, similar to 'The Family' is given:

"As an organization of Catholics – half-monks, half-soldiers – they seek to sanctify themselves through political struggle and their goal is to gain power. It's a hierarchical structure governed by the motto "He who obeys does not go astray." They overlap with the Church, invoking the bishops and the pope with an ethical, Christian discourse and with right-wing political and media organizations"

And:

"the Anvil is made up of airtight cells, to make effective the following rule: "Know no more than what is strictly necessary." He claims to have no clue how many members there are, but says there are national and international leaders. "Our enemies were masonry, the gay movement, feminism, de facto unions, abortion, Marxism, and of course, Zionism""

What does the Roman church authority have to say about this?

"Cardinal Antonio Cañizares, the former archbishop of Toledo and current prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, based in the Vatican [stated] "They're not called the Anvil any more; now they go by the Association for the Common Good and I think they are offering great services to society""

The major differences between the Catholic and Orthodox are more than cosmetic, the church at Rome is a strict hierarchy with a dominionist theology founded in neo-Platonic thought. The Orthodox church theology is, by contrast, rooted in mystic asceticism. Catholicism is aggressive in comparison to the Orthodox, and particularly aggressive towards the Russian Orthodox Church:

"After the breakdown of the Soviet Union" [a spokesman for the Russian Patriarch said] "a great number of people in the Roman Catholic Church decided that was the moment when it was possible to conquer these big territories and huge populations of the countries of the former Soviet Union"

Ukrainian Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the Greek Catholic Church, it must be noted, is a stealth Roman Catholic, having trained at Rome in the Roman doctrine of Thomas Aquinas' neo-Platonic theology, anathema to the Orthodox Rite he purportedly represents as an Eastern Rite or so-called 'Greek Catholic' (with allegiance to the Pope.)

The Church at Rome aligned Greek Catholic minority (6%) he represents in Ukraine, makes his elevation into American foreign policy circles (under the guise of a 'religious' event) all out of proportion to the Ukrainian mainstream Orthodox (Moscow Patriarchate), but this begins to make sense when one looks at the larger picture coming into focus with the USA dominionist agenda in concert with recent USA policy promoted in Ukraine. In fact the USA putsch installed 'interim' prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, is a right wing Greek Catholic, in league with the neo-nazi Svoboda party which held five ministries in his new [2014] putsch regime.

So, who is using who here? Is the Roman Catholic church using the dominionists in the USA or are the USA 'Family' dominionists using the Roman Catholic church? The plain answer is both. It  is a joint effort in Ukraine.

This analysis points to church-state intrigue of a sort you'd expect in medieval Europe. It would appear some habits never die…

Germany's Role

Nazi_Eagle

3rd Reich monument at Lindau (Bodensee)

denazification |dēˌnätsəfiˈkāSHən|
noun: the process of bringing the leaders of the National Socialist regime in Germany to justice and of purging all elements of Nazism from public life.

Denazification didn't actually happen in Germany folks, I took the photo of the Third Reich eagle (NAZI monument) at Lindau myself, in 2008. Germany still harbors deep NAZI sentiment widely, particularly in the south. Many Nazi criminals were quietly reintegrated to German society and lived out life unpunished with rationale such as:

"the West German Supreme Court overturned the judgment .. saying Rehse and other judges of the [NAZI] People's Court had only been abiding by the laws of the time"

Because:

"The Americans and the British turned over the denazification program to the Germans, who made a mockery of it by electing or appointing some Nazis back into power"

It is only recently, with the most serious offenders dead of old age, a few lowly camp guards have been prosecuted in what amounts to a token expression of social responsibility. Insofar as Angela Merkel's government had been years in coalition with (Scholz's) Social Democrats, together with her Christian Democrats and their ideologically aligned Christian Social Union, this points to a wider tolerance of the German past than could even be imagined only a short time ago. But first:

On 24 March 2014, in Ukraine, Oleksandr Muzychko, neo-nazi leader of the 'Right Sector', was assassinated by interior ministry elite special operations police of the new regime in Kiev. He was without doubt a nasty man, a killer, criminal and terrorist. And because he was incredibly stupid, he also died a 'patsy' or that is a used and discarded stooge.

Ukraine_nazi

Oleksandr Muzychko

This man led the skinheads who provided the 'muscle' behind the violence that brought the new regime to power in Kiev. Now, his CIA supported putsch having been accomplished, he became an embarrassment. Can't have people running around openly proclaiming a NAZI agenda. Muzychko, having been used to provide a service, was then shot dead in a demonstration of the new regime asserting 'law and order.' The Western media spin will be all about tamping down on the criminal NAZI element in the Kiev uprising and all  the USA's sheep will sleep better at night, knowing NATO & 'friends' aren't doing business with NAZIs (and couldn't be more misled.)

It is beyond question the USA's intelligence (CIA, primarily), having utilized Muzychko to optimal putsch effect prior to demanded he be eliminated (the more likely story) for appearance sake. In today's game, you cannot be openly Nazi, you have to conceal the fact in order to qualify for support from the western democracies leaders. But in fact a neo-nazi party, Svoboda, held five ministries in the putsch regime at Kiev, putting down the 'Right Sector' was a smokescreen. Check this out:

"One of the "Big Three" political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the "Muscovite-Jewish mafia." After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was "fighting for truth." In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok's [Svoboda's] deputy [member of parliament] Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called "the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center""

Kind of puts this next photo in perspective:

merkel_nazi

Far-fetched? Perhaps not

Can anyone explain how Merkel (and Scholz) would not have known this following?

"The European Parliament in 2012 condemned Svoboda's racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia as "against the EU's fundamental values and principles"

Especially considering

"In [the 2011] commemoration of the 1918 Battle of Kruty, Svoboda, accompanied by a substantial number of so-called autonomous nationalists, organized a huge torchlight parade, rife with Nazi symbolism.

"On April 28, 2011, Svoboda celebrated the 68th anniversary of the establishment of the Waffen-SS Galizien. Octogenarian Waffen-SS veterans were treated as heroes in a mass rally, organized by Svoboda and the "autonomous nationalists"" -quoting 'The Return of the Ukrainian Far Right' by Swedish academic Per Anders Rudling (2013)

I hold Germany responsible for the Nazis put in power in Kiev, not the USA. Why? Historic responsibility, plain and simple. Scholz has a historic responsibility to call out the the facts of a Nazi regime in Kiev and refuse on principle to do business with killers laundered into power by the CIA (and their lackey BND.) If a German leader had the personal courage to do this, it would stop the nonsense in its tracks and we'd have a whole new geo-political game. But in fact German politicians are cowards (or worse.)

Think Scholz doesn't know this next?

"the Ukrainian right wing has also received instruction financed by German taxpayers. [Svoboda] Party members appeared at events hosted by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, the German political foundation affiliated with Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives. Examples include the conference entitled "Lessons from the 2012 Parliamentary Elections," the seminar series called "The Higher School of Politics" and a discussion on the 2012 elections"

Nazi_Salute

Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok

Without a doubt, despite CIA media laundering, German intelligence certainly knows the facts about Svoboda, and nothing is done. I wonder what that has to with the preceding noted article going on to mention…

"[Svoboda] Party members appeared at events hosted by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, the German political foundation affiliated with Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives"

… considering who have been the German interior ministers of the past decade, responsible for domestic intelligence. All have been appointments from the German right. You think these Merkel Christian Democrat, and their affiliated Christian Social Union political appointments, didn't know the Merkel aligned Adenauer foundation is associating with and sponsoring NAZIs? Recall today's Chancellor Scholz had been in a 'Grand Coalition' partnership with these people, for years.

"Adenauer's determination to integrate the right-wing nationalists who supported the Nazis into the CDU and thus into an acceptance of democracy explains much of the apparent paradox between his dislike of National Socialism and his willingess to accept men who had been very active in supporting the National Socialist dictatorship"

What's more is, Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) or Federal Intelligence Service (Germany) reports directly to Germany's chancellor. This German counterpart to the CIA had been midwifed into existence by the USA's rescue of the Nazi regime's intelligence at the end of World War Two. Initially organized by the OSS and subsequently CIA as the 'Gehlen Organization' under Hitler's veteran Eastern front spymaster (Nazi war criminal) Reinhard Gehlen, the BND came into existence when the "Gehlen Organization", staffed with Nazi intelligence & SS veterans, as well as more than 100 former Gestapo officers, was transferred by the USA to the Federal Republic of Germany (then so-called 'West Germany') to be under the authority of Chancellor Konrad Adenauer. And so it was Hitler's top anti-Russian intelligence talent became Germany's post-war CIA. One can only imagine Reinhard Gehlen's smirk when he'd stated his organization employed a lower percentage of former SS & Gestapo than most ministries in Adenauer's Federal Republic of Germany government

Following on this historical political fantasy of a leopard shedding its spots in post-war Germany, of these recent interior ministers, Hans-Peter Friedrich & Horst Seehofer are from the Christian Social Union's 'unreconstructed south' of Germany, de Maizière & Schäuble are from Adenauer's Nazi integrated Christian Democrats (Merkel's CDU.)

Wolfgang Schäuble, 22 November 2005 to 28 October 2009

Thomas de Maizière, 28 October 2009 to 3 March 2011

Hans-Peter Friedrich, 3 March 2011 to 17 December 2013 (boss when files likely incriminating the German police relationship to neo-nazis were shredded)

Thomas de Maizière, 17 December 2013 to 14 March 2018

Horst Seehofer, 14 March 2018 to 8 December 2021

The frosting on the Adenauer empowered Nazi cake would be this next:

"Arrested by the Canadian Army in 1945 Alfried Krupp was tried as a war criminal at Nuremberg. He was accused of plundering occupied territories and being responsible for the barbaric treatment of prisoners of war and concentration camp inmates. Documents showed that Krupp initiated the request for slave labour and signed detailed contracts with the SS, giving them responsibility for inflicting punishment on the workers.

"Krupp was eventually found guilty of being a major war criminal and sentenced to twelve years in prison and had all his wealth and property confiscated.

"On 5th December, 1950, Adenauer wrote .. a letter urging clemency for Krupp.

"In January, 1951, [it was] announced that Alfried Krupp and eight members of his board of directors who had been convicted with him, were to be released. His property, valued at around 45 million, and his numerous companies were also restored to him" (45 million in 1951 is 410 million 2014, adjusted for inflation)

Denial aside, Adenauer's Nazis reintegrated to the politics post-war Germany, could explain a lot about Germany's strongly supportive relationship with the Nazi regime in Kiev, you think?

Meanwhile, In Nazi Germany's 'Neu Ostland'

Lithuania:

"Vilnius: Lithuania on Thursday accused Russia of a military [2014] "invasion" of conflict-torn Ukraine and called for a United Nations Security Council meeting over the issue.

"Lithuania strongly condemns the obvious invasion of the territory of Ukraine by the armed forces of the Russian Federation," the foreign ministry said, adding that the Security Council should address the matter "immediately""

Never mind the CIA, with the complicity of Germany, overthrew an elected government in Ukraine and has supported a post-coup neo-nazi regime in Kiev.

Neo-Nazis march in Kaunus, Lithuania, February 16, 2013 (photo: Dovid Katz)

Neo-Nazis march in Lithuania, February 16, 2013 (Dovid Katz photo, Times of Israel)

^ "one of the "heroes" of the marchers whose portrait appeared on a large banner was Juozas Ambrazevicius, the Prime Minister of the Provisional Lithuanian government of June 1941, which fully supported the Third Reich […] in May 2012, his remains were brought back to Lithuania and buried in Kaunas with full national honors, despite his despicable role in Holocaust crimes"

Latvia:

"Four Latvian MPs (E. Cilinskis, J. Dombrava, R. Dzintars, I. Parādnieks) attended the Waffen SS fest giving it, in 2014, a flavor of state approval taken in tandem with the gifting of the city center and Liberty Monument area"

Screenshot of the Latvian National-Socialist Party glorifying this annual festival taken down at youtube:

chihuahua4 (^ fine print: notice Baltic Nazi sympathies are in line with the Ukrainian Svoboda Party & Right Sector the Russians are taking issue with, Nazis having taken power in Kiev with ample assistance from an ever more aggressive & expanding NATO.)

Estonia:

"Russia has been destabilising Ukraine for too long. By now, terrorists acting in Eastern Ukraine have received added reinforcements in the form of Russian military forces that can clearly be recognised. This is undeclared war"

Sure, it actually is undeclared war, a war began by NATO and the EU undermining Ukraine, empowering neo-nazis, while crapping on its promise to Russia not to expand NATO when the Russians agreed to dismantle the Soviet Union. And speaking of terrorists in Eastern Ukraine, what do you suppose that might have to do with the coup supporters murdering people en mass on multiple occasions? One of those occasions, the Maidan massacre, is spoken to by the Estonian foreign minister, captured in a leaked phone call:

"So that there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition"

Now, why do you suppose the Estonian didn't go public with this? Because the Estonian government also harbors Nazi sentiment?

"It is really surprising that Estonia has so hysterical reactions in their need [to] support the SS-Waffen celebration. I wrote a RT-column about two weeks ago about these celebrations. And now SS-Waffen celebrations are carried out again in Estonia, but Estonia's security service wrote the prohibition against me to enter the country. Estonia limits the freedom of journalists to report about the political phenomena, if these journalists don't work under the service of Estonian security service and their ideology.

"I had a plan to enter to Estonia and write a RT-column about these SS-Waffen celebrations, feelings, symbols, etc. I haven't ever done any crimes in Estonia (or in other country), I am an EU-citizen. Fortunately, I had planned to travel separately from Finnish friends of mine. If did I travel with them on board, now I would sit in a prison cell, together with Dr. Johan Bäckman.

"Johan Bäckman, an adjunct professor at the Helsinki university, was arrested during last night 30th July although his name was not on any "blacklist". Bäckman has never done any crime in Estonia. He would have written critically about these Nazi celebrations.

"Petri Krohn, the president of the association Finland without Nazism has also an entry ban for the days of SS-celebrations" …

Finally

The English sub-titled version of the film 'Ukraine: The Masks of the Revolution' by French Journalist Paul Moreira was almost immediately taken down by youtube following its release by Canal+ TV in France. This film had Kiev's apologists squealing like electrocuted pigs, so it must have hit a nerve. Read Moreria's defense of his documentary HERE.

This film's interviews of the Odessa massacre survivors & perpetrators goes far towards setting the record straight on who was behind the 2014 events in Ukraine.

Where does it end? War with Russia on account of the West's Nazis?

Updated 5 April 2022

Ronald Thomas West
Sat, 26 Feb 2022 18:50:01 +0000

Putin’s Doctrine


In the Western media bath of information warfare promoting panic and demonization of Russia and Russians, people should know what people 'on the other side' are thinking. Here is a top contemporary thinker from the Russian side. I do see the logic of what he is saying; insofar as to whether I agree with none of it, some of it or all of it, is unimportant. What's important is the opportunity for people to consider the logic of what he is saying; to better understand the Russian point of view.

Professor Sergey Karaganov is the honorary chairman of Russia's Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and academic supervisor at the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs Higher School of Economics (HSE) in Moscow. His essay of 25 February 2022:

The Putin Doctrine – Russia's Foreign Policy Of Constructive Destruction

Constructive destruction is not aggressive. Russia maintains it isn't going to attack anyone or blow them up. It simply doesn't need to. The outside world provides Russia with more and more geopolitical opportunities for medium-term development as it is. With one big exception. NATO's expansion and formal or informal inclusion of Ukraine poses a risk to the country's security that Moscow simply won't accept.

For now, the West is on course to a slow but inevitable decay, both in terms of internal and external affairs and even the economy. And this is precisely why it has started this new Cold War after almost five hundred years of domination in world politics, the economy, and culture. Especially after its decisive victory in the 1990s to mid-2000s. I believe it will most likely lose, stepping down as the global leader and becoming a more reasonable partner. And not a moment too soon: Russia will need to balance relations with a friendly, but increasingly more powerful China.

Presently, the West desperately tries to defend against this with aggressive rhetoric. It tries to consolidate, playing its last trump cards to reverse this trend. One of those is trying to use Ukraine to damage and neuter Russia. It's important to prevent these convulsive attempts from transforming into a full-fledged standoff and to counter the current US and NATO policies. They are counterproductive and dangerous, though relatively undemanding for the initiators. We are yet to convince the West that it is only hurting itself.

Another trump card is the West's dominating role in the existing Euro-Atlantic security system established at a time when Russia was seriously weakened following the Cold War. There's merit in gradually erasing this system, primarily by refusing to take part in it and play by its obsolete rules, which are inherently disadvantageous to us. For Russia, the western track should become secondary to its Eurasian diplomacy. Maintaining constructive relations with the countries in the western part of the continent may ease the integration into Greater Eurasia for Russia. The old system is in the way, though, and so it should be dismantled.

The critical next step to creating a new system (aside from dismantling the old one) is 'uniting the lands'. It's a necessity for Moscow, not a whim.

It would be nice if we had more time to do this. But history shows that, since the collapse of the USSR 30 years ago, few post-Soviet nations have managed to become truly independent. And some may never even get there, for various reasons. This is a subject for a future analysis. Right now, I can only point out the obvious: Most local elites don't have the historical or cultural experience of state-building. They've never been able to become the core of the nation – they didn't have enough time for this. When the shared intellectual and cultural space disappeared, it hurt small countries the most. The new opportunities to build ties with the West turned out to be no replacement. Those who have found themselves at the helm of such nations have been selling their country for their own benefit, because there's been no national idea to fight for.

The majority of those countries will either follow the example of the Baltic states, accepting external control, or continue to spiral out of control, which in some cases may be extremely dangerous.

The question is: How to 'unite' the nations in the most efficient and beneficial way for Russia, taking into account the tsarist and Soviet experience, when the sphere of influence was extended beyond any reasonable limits and then kept together at the expense of core Russian peoples?

Let's leave the discussion about the 'unification' that history is forcing on us for another day. This time, let's focus on the objective need to make a tough decision and adopt the 'constructive destruction' policy.

The milestones we passed

Today, we see the inception of the fourth era of Russia's foreign policy. The first one started in the late 1980s, and it was a time of weakness and delusions. The nation had lost the will to fight, people wanted to believe democracy and the West would come and save them. It all ended in 1999 after the first waves of NATO expansion, seen by Russians as a backstabbing move, when the West tore apart what was left of Yugoslavia.

Then Russia started to get up off its knees and rebuild, stealthily and covertly, while appearing friendly and humbled. The US withdrawing from the ABM Treaty signaled its intention to regain its strategic dominance, so the still broke Russia made a fateful decision to develop weapon systems to challenge American aspirations. The Munich speech, the Georgian War, and the army reform, conducted amid a global economic crisis that spelled the end of the western liberal globalist imperialism (the term coined by a prominent expert on international affairs, Richard Sakwa) marked the new goal for Russian foreign policy – to once again become a leading global power that can defend its sovereignty and interests. This was followed by the events in Crimea, Syria, the military build-up, and blocking the West from interfering in Russia's domestic affairs, rooting out from the public service those who partnered with the West to the disadvantage of their homeland, including by a masterful use of the West's reaction to those developments. As the tensions keep growing, looking up to the West and keeping assets there becomes increasingly less lucrative.

China's incredible rise and becoming de-facto allies with Beijing starting in the 2010s, the pivot to the East, and the multidimensional crisis that enveloped the West led to a great shift in political and geoeconomic balance in favor of Russia. This is especially pronounced in Europe. Only a decade ago, the EU saw Russia as a backward and weak outskirts of the continent trying to contend with major powers. Now, it is desperately trying to cling to the geopolitical and geoeconomic independence that is slipping through its fingers.

The 'back to greatness' period ended around 2017 to 2018. After that, Russia hit a plateau. The modernization continued, but the weak economy threatened to negate its achievements. People (myself included) were frustrated, fearing that Russia once again was going to "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory." But that turned out to be another build-up period, primarily in terms of defense capabilities.

Russia has gotten ahead, making sure that for the next decade, it will be relatively invulnerable strategically and capable of "dominating in an escalation scenario" in case of conflicts in the regions within its sphere of interests.

The ultimatum that Russia issued to the US and NATO at the end of 2021, demanding they stop developing military infrastructure near the Russian borders and expansion to the east, marked the start of the 'constructive destruction'. The goal is not simply to stop the flagging, albeit really dangerous inertia of the West's geostrategic push, but also to start laying the foundation for a new kind of relations between Russia and the West, different from what we settled on in the 1990s.

Russia's military capabilities, the returning sense of moral righteousness, lessons learned from past mistakes, and a close alliance with China could mean that the West, which chose the role of an adversary, will start being reasonable, even if not all the time. Then, in a decade or sooner, I hope, a new system of international security and cooperation will be built that will include the whole Greater Eurasia this time, and it will be based on UN principles and international law, not unilateral 'rules' that the West has been trying to impose on the world in recent decades.

Correcting mistakes

Before I go any further, let me say that I think very highly of Russian diplomacy – it's been absolutely brilliant in the past 25 years. Moscow was dealt a weak hand but managed to play a great game nevertheless. First, it didn't let the West 'finish it off'. Russia maintained its formal status of a great country, retaining permanent membership in the UN Security Council and keeping nuclear arsenals. Then it gradually improved its global standing by leveraging the weaknesses of its rivals and the strengths of its partners. Building a strong friendship with China has been a major achievement. Russia has some geopolitical advantages that the Soviet Union didn't have. Unless, of course, it goes back to the aspirations of becoming a global superpower, which eventually ruined the USSR.

However, we shouldn't forget the mistakes we've made so we don't repeat them. It was our laziness, weakness, and bureaucratic inertia that helped create and keep afloat the unjust and unstable system of European security that we have today.

The beautifully-worded Charter of Paris for a New Europe that was signed in 1990 had a statement about freedom of association – countries could choose their allies, something that would've been impossible under the 1975 Helsinki Declaration. Since the Warsaw Pact was running on fumes at that point, this clause meant that NATO would be free to expand. This is the document everyone keeps referring to, even in Russia. Back in 1990, however, NATO could at least be considered a "defense" organization. The alliance and most of its members have launched a number of aggressive military campaigns since then – against the remnants of Yugoslavia, as well as in Iraq and Libya.

After a heart-to-heart chat with Lech Walesa in 1993, Boris Yeltsin signed a document where it stated that Russia "understood Poland's plan to join NATO." When Andrey Kozyrev, Russia's foreign minister at the time, learned about NATO's expansion plans in 1994, he began a bargaining process on Russia's behalf without consulting the president. The other side took it as a sign that Russia was OK with the general concept, since it was trying to negotiate acceptable terms. In 1995, Moscow stepped on the brakes, but it was too late – the dam burst and swept away any reservations about the West's expansion efforts.

In 1997, Russia, being economically weak and completely dependent on the West, signed the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security with NATO. Moscow was able to compel certain concessions from the West, like the pledge not to deploy large military units to the new member states. NATO has been consistently violating this obligation. Another agreement was to keep these territories free of nuclear weapons. The US would not have wanted it anyway, because it had been trying to distance itself from a potential nuclear conflict in Europe as much as possible (despite their allies' wishes), since it would undoubtedly cause a nuclear strike against America. In reality, the document legitimized NATO's expansion.

There were other mistakes – not as major but extremely painful nevertheless. Russia participated in the Partnership for Peace program, the sole purpose of which was to make it look like NATO was prepared to listen to Moscow, but in reality, the alliance was using the project to justify its existence and further expansion. Another frustrating misstep was our involvement in the NATO-Russia Council after the Yugoslavia aggression. The topics discussed at that level desperately lacked substance. They should've focused on the truly significant issue – restraining the alliance's expansion and the buildup of its military infrastructure near the Russian borders. Sadly, this never made it to the agenda. The Council continued to operate even after the majority of NATO members started a war in Iraq and then Libya in 2011.

It is very unfortunate that we never got the nerve to openly say it – NATO had become an aggressor that committed numerous war crimes. This would've been a sobering truth for various political circles in Europe, like in Finland and Sweden for example, where some are considering the advantages of joining the organization. And all the others for that matter, with their mantra about NATO being a defense and deterrence alliance that needs to be further consolidated so it can stand against imaginary enemies.

I understand those in the West who are used to the existing system that allows the Americans to buy the obedience of their junior partners, and not just in terms of military support, while these allies can save on security expenses by selling part of their sovereignty. But what do we gain from this system? Especially now that it's become obvious that it breeds and escalates confrontation at our western borders and in the whole world.

NATO feeds off forced confrontation, and the longer the organization exists, the worse this confrontation will be.

The bloc is a threat to its members as well. While provoking confrontation, it doesn't actually guarantee protection. It is not true that Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty warrants collective defense if one ally is attacked. This article doesn't say that this is automatically guaranteed. I am familiar with the history of the bloc and the discussions in America regarding its establishment. I know for a fact that the US will never deploy nuclear weapons to "protect" its allies if there is conflict with a nuclear state.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is also outdated. It is dominated by NATO and the EU that use the organization to drag out the confrontation and impose the West's political values and standards on everyone else. Fortunately, this policy is becoming less and less effective. In the mid-2010s I had the chance to work with the OSCE Panel of Eminent Persons (what a name!), which was supposed to develop a new mandate for the organization. And if I had my doubts about the OSCE's effectiveness before that, this experience convinced me that it is an extremely destructive institution. It's an antiquated organization with a mission to preserve things that are obsolete. In the 1990s, it served as an instrument of burying any attempt made by Russia or others to create a common European security system; in the 2000s, the so-called Corfu Process bogged down Russia's new security initiative.

Practically all UN institutions have been squeezed out of the continent, including the UN Economic Commission for Europe, its Human Rights Council and Security Council. Once upon a time, the OSCE was viewed as a useful organization that would promote the UN system and principles in a key subcontinent. That didn't happen.

As for NATO, it is very clear what we should do. We need to undermine the bloc's moral and political legitimacy and refuse any institutional partnership, since its counterproductivity is obvious. Only the military should continue to communicate, but as an auxiliary channel that would supplement dialogue with the DOD and defense ministries of leading European nations. After all, it's not Brussels that makes strategically important decisions.

The same policy could be adopted when it comes to the OSCE. Yes, there is a difference, because even though this is a destructive organization, it never initiated any wars, destabilization, or killings. So we need to keep our involvement in this format to a minimum. Some say that this is the only context that provides the Russian foreign minister with a chance to see his counterparts. That is not true. The UN can offer an even better context. Bilateral talks are much more effective anyway, because it is easier for the bloc to hijack the agenda when there is a crowd. Sending observers and peacekeepers through the UN would also make a lot more sense.

The limited article format does not allow me to dwell on specific policies for each European organization, like the Council of Europe for example. But I would define the general principle this way – we partner where we see benefits for ourselves and keep our distance otherwise.

Thirty years under the current system of European institutions proved that continuing with it would be detrimental. Russia doesn't benefit in any way from Europe's disposition towards breeding and escalating confrontation or even posing military threat to the subcontinent and the whole world. Back in the day, we could dream that Europe would help us bolster security, as well as political and economic modernization. Instead, they are undermining security, so why would we copy the West's dysfunctional and deteriorating political system? Do we really need these new values that they have adopted?

We will have to limit the expansion by refusing to cooperate within an eroding system. Hopefully, by taking a firm stand and leaving our civilization neighbors from the West to their own devices, we will actually help them. The elites may return to a less suicidal policy that would be safer for everyone. Of course, we have to be smart about taking ourselves out of the equation and make sure to minimize the collateral damage that the failing system will inevitably cause. But maintaining it in its current form is simply dangerous.

Policies for tomorrow's Russia

As the existing global order continues to crumble, it seems that the most prudent course for Russia would be to sit it out for as long as possible – to take cover within the walls of its 'neo-isolationist fortress' and deal with domestic matters. But this time, history demands that we take action. Many of my suggestions with respect to the foreign policy approach I have tentatively called 'constructive destruction' naturally emerge from the analysis presented above.

There is no need to interfere or to try to influence the internal dynamics of the West, whose elites are desperate enough to start a new cold war against Russia. What we should do instead is use various foreign policy instruments – including military ones – to establish certain red lines. Meanwhile, as the Western system continues to steer towards moral, political, and economic degradation, non-Western powers (with Russia as a major player) will inevitably see their geo-political, geo-economic and geo-ideological positions strengthen.

Our Western partners predictably try to squelch Russia's calls for security guarantees and take advantage of the ongoing diplomatic process in order to extend the lifespan of their own institutions. There is no need to give up dialogue or cooperation in matters of trade, politics, culture, education, and healthcare, whenever it's useful. But we must also use the time we've got to ramp up military-political, psychological, and even military-technical pressure – not so much on Ukraine, whose people have been turned into cannon fodder for a new Cold War – but on the collective West, in order to force it to change its mind and step back from the policies it has pursued for the past several decades. There is nothing to fear about the confrontation escalating: We saw tensions grow even as Russia was trying to appease the Western world. What we should do is prepare for a stronger pushback from the West; also, Russia should be able to offer the world a long-term alternative – a new political framework based on peace and cooperation.

The West can try to intimidate us with devastating sanctions – but we are also capable of deterring the West with our own threat of an asymmetrical response, one that would cripple Western economies and disrupt whole societies.

Naturally, it is useful to remind our partners, from time to time, that there exists a mutually beneficial alternative to all that.

If Russia carries out reasonable but assertive policies (domestically, too), it will successfully (and relatively peacefully) overcome the latest surge of Western hostility. As I have written before, we stand a good chance of winning this Cold War.

What also inspires optimism is Russia's own past record: We have more than once managed to tame the imperial ambitions of foreign powers – for our own good, and for the good of humanity, as a whole. Russia was able to transform would-be empires into tame and relatively harmless neighbors: Sweden after the Battle of Poltava, France after Borodino, Germany after Stalingrad and Berlin.

We can find a slogan for the new Russian policy toward the West in a verse from Alexander Blok's 'The Scythians', a brilliant poem that seems especially relevant today: "Come join us, then! Leave war and war's alarms, / And grasp the hand of peace and amity. / While still there's time, Comrades, lay down your arms! / Let us unite in true fraternity!"

While attempting to heal our relations with the West (even if that requires some bitter medicine), we must remember that, while culturally close to us, the Western world is running out of time – in fact, it has been for two decades now. It is essentially in damage control mode, seeking cooperation whenever possible. The real prospects and challenges of our present and future lie with the East and the South. Taking a harder line with Western nations must not distract Russia from maintaining its pivot to the East. And we have seen this pivot slow down in the past two or three years, especially when it comes to developing territories beyond the Ural Mountains.

We must not allow Ukraine to become a security threat to Russia. That said, it would be counterproductive to spend too many administrative and political (not to mention economic) resources on it. Russia must learn to actively manage this volatile situation, keep it within limits. Most of Ukraine has been neutered by its own anti-national elite, corrupted by the West, and infected with the pathogen of militant nationalism.

It would be much more effective to invest in the East, in the development of Siberia. By creating favorable working and living conditions, we will attract not only Russian citizens, but also people from the other parts of the former Russian Empire, including the Ukrainians. The latter have, historically, contributed a great deal to the development of Siberia.

Let me reiterate a point from my other articles: It was the incorporation of Siberia under Ivan the Terrible that made Russia a great power, not the accession of Ukraine under Aleksey Mikhaylovich, known under the moniker 'the most peaceful'. It is high time we stopped repeating Zbigniew Brzezinski's disingenuous – and so strikingly Polish – assertion that Russia cannot be a great power without Ukraine. The opposite is much closer to the truth: Russia cannot be a great power when it is burdened by an increasingly unwieldy Ukraine – a political entity created by Lenin which later expanded westward under Stalin.

The most promising path for Russia lies with the development and strengthening of ties with China. A partnership with Beijing would multiply the potential of both countries many times over. If the West carries on with its bitterly hostile policies, it wouldn't be unreasonable to consider a temporary five-year defense alliance with China. Naturally, one should also be careful not to get 'dizzy with success' on the China track, so as not to return to the medieval model of China's Middle Kingdom, which grew by turning its neighbors into vassals. We should help Beijing wherever we can to keep it from suffering even a momentary defeat in the new Cold War unleashed by the West. That defeat would weaken us, too. Besides, we know all too well what the West transforms into when it thinks it is winning. It took some harsh remedies to treat America's hangover after it got drunk with power in the 1990s.

Clearly, an East-oriented policy must not focus solely on China. Both the East and the South are on the rise in global politics, economics, and culture, which is partly due to our undermining of the West's military superiority – the primary source of its 500-year hegemony.

When the time comes to establish a new system of European security to replace the dangerously outdated existing one, it must be done within the framework of a greater Eurasian project. Nothing worthwhile can be born out of the old Euro-Atlantic system.

It is self-evident that success requires the development and modernization of the country's economic, technological, and scientific potential – all pillars of a country's military power, which remains the backbone of any nation's sovereignty and security. Russia cannot be successful without improving the quality of life for the majority of its people: This includes overall prosperity, healthcare, education, and the environment.

The restriction of political freedoms, which is inevitable when confronting the collective West, must by no means extend to the intellectual sphere. This is difficult, but achievable. For the talented, creatively-minded part of the population who are ready to serve their country, we must preserve as much intellectual freedom as possible. Scientific development through Soviet-style 'sharashkas' (research and development laboratories operating within the Soviet labor camp system) is not something that would work in the modern world. Freedom enhances the talents of Russian people, and inventiveness runs in our blood. Even in foreign policy, the freedom from ideological constraints that we enjoy offers us massive advantages compared to our more close-minded neighbors. History teaches us that the brutal restriction of freedom of thought imposed by the Communist regime on its people led the Soviet Union to ruin. Preserving personal freedom is an essential condition for any nation's development.

If we want to grow as a society and be victorious, it is absolutely vital that we develop a spiritual backbone – a national idea, an ideology that unites and shines the way forward. It is a fundamental truth that great nations cannot be truly great without such an idea at their core. This is part of the tragedy that happened to us in the 1970s and 1980s. Hopefully, the resistance of the ruling elites to the advancement of a new ideology, rooted in the pains of the communist era, is beginning to fade. Vladimir Putin's speech at the October 2021 annual meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club was a powerful reassuring signal in that respect.

Like the ever-growing number of Russian philosophers and authors, I have put forward my own vision of the 'Russian idea. (I apologize for having to reference my own publications again – it is an inevitable side effect of having to stick to the format).

Questions for the future

And now let's discuss a significant, yet mostly overlooked aspect of the new policy that needs to be addressed. We need to dismiss and reform the obsolete and often harmful ideological foundation of our social sciences and public life for this new policy to get implemented, let alone succeed.

This doesn't mean we have to reject once again the advancements in political science, economy, and foreign affairs of our predecessors. The Bolsheviks tried to dump the social ideas of tsarist Russia – everybody knows how this played out. We rejected Marxism and were happy about it. Now, fed up with other tenets, we realize we were too impatient with it. Marx, Engels, and Lenin had sound ideas in their theory of imperialism we could use.

Social sciences that study the ways of public and private life have to take into account national context, however inclusive it wants to appear. It stems from the national history and ultimately is aimed to help the nations and/or their government and elites. The mindless application of solutions valid in one country to another are fruitless and only create abominations.

We need to start working towards intellectual independence after we achieve military security and political and economic sovereignty. In the new world, it's compulsory to achieve development and exert influence. Mikhail Remizov, a prominent Russian political scientist, was the first, as far as I know, to call this 'intellectual decolonization'.

Having spent decades in the shadow of imported Marxism, we've begun a transition to yet another foreign ideology of liberal democracy in economics and political science and, to certain extent, even in foreign policy and defense. This fascination has done us no good – we've lost land, technology, and people. In the mid-2000s, we started to exercise our sovereignty, but had to rely on our instincts rather than clear national (again – it cannot be anything else) scientific and ideological principles.

We still don't have the courage to acknowledge that the scientific and ideological worldview we've had for the last forty to fifty years is obsolete and/or was intended to serve foreign elites.

To illustrate this point, here are a few randomly picked questions from my very long list.

I'll start with existential issues, purely philosophical ones. What comes first in humans, the spirit or the matter? And in the more mundane political sense – what drives people and states in the modern world? To common Marxists and liberals, the answer is the economy. Just remember that until recently Bill Clinton's famous "It's the economy, stupid" was thought to be an axiom. But people seek something greater when the basic need for food is satisfied. Love for their family, their homeland, desire for national dignity, personal freedoms, power, and fame. The hierarchy of needs has been well known to us since Maslow introduced it in the 1940–50s in his famous pyramid. Modern capitalism, however, twisted it, forcing ever-expanding consumption via traditional media at first and all-encompassing digital networks later – for rich and poor, each according to their ability.

What can we do when the modern capitalism deprived of moral or religious foundations incites limitless consumption, breaking down moral and geographic boundaries and comes into conflict with nature, threatening the very existence of our species? We, Russians, understand better than anybody that attempts to get rid of entrepreneurs and capitalists who are driven by the desire to build wealth will have disastrous consequences for society and the environment (the socialist economy model wasn't exactly environmentally friendly).

What do we do with the latest values of rejecting history, your homeland, gender, and beliefs, as well as aggressive LGBT and ultra-feminist movements? I respect the right to follow them, but I think they're post-humanist. Should we treat this as just another stage of social evolution? I don't think so. Should we try to ward it off, limit its spread, and wait till society lives through this moral epidemic? Or should we actively fight it, leading the majority of humanity that adheres to so-called "conservative" values or, to put it simply, normal human values? Should we get into the fight escalating an already dangerous confrontation with the Western elites?

The technological development and increased labor productivity have helped feed the majority of people, but the world itself has slipped into anarchy, and many guiding principles have been lost at the global level. Security concerns, perhaps, are prevailing over the economy once again. Military instruments and the political will might take the lead from now on.

What is military deterrence in the modern world? Is it a threat to cause damage to national and individual assets or foreign assets and information infrastructure to which today's Western elites are tied so closely? What will become of the Western world if this infrastructure is brought down?

And a related question: What is strategic parity we still talk about today? Is it some foreign nonsense picked by Soviet leaders who sucked their people into an exhausting arms race because of their inferiority complex and June 22, 1941 syndrome? Looks like we are already answering this question, even though we still churn out speeches about equality and symmetrical measures.

And what is this arms control many believe to be instrumental? Is it an attempt to restrain the expensive arms race beneficial to the wealthier economy, to limit the risk of hostilities or something more – a tool to legitimize the race, the development of arms, and the process of unnecessary programs on your opponent? There's no obvious answer to that.

But let's go back to the more existential questions.

Is democracy really the pinnacle of political development? Or is it just another tool that helps the elites control society, if we are not talking about Aristotle's pure democracy (which also has certain limitations)? There are many tools that come and go as society and conditions change. Sometimes we abandon them only to bring them back when the time is right and there's external and internal demand for them. I'm not calling for boundless authoritarianism or monarchy. I think we have already overdone it with centralization, especially at the municipal government level. But if this is just a tool, shouldn't we stop pretending that we strive for democracy and put it straight – we want personal freedoms, a prosperous society, security, and national dignity? But how do we justify power to the people then?

Is the state really destined to die off, as Marxists and liberal globalists used to believe, as they dreamed of alliances between transnational corporations, international NGOs (both have been going through nationalization and privatization), and supranational political bodies? We'll see how long the EU can survive in its current form. Note that I don't want to say there's no reason to join national efforts for the greater good, like bringing down expensive custom barriers or introducing joint environmental policies. Or isn't it better to focus on developing your own state and supporting neighbors while disregarding global problems created by others? Aren't they going to mess with us if we act this way?

What is the role of land and territories? Is it a dwindling asset, a burden as was believed among political scientists only recently? Or the greatest national treasure, especially in the face of the environmental crisis, climate change, the growing deficit of water and food in some regions and the total lack of it in others?

What should we do then with hundreds of millions of Pakistanis, Indians, Arabs, and others whose lands might soon be uninhabitable? Should we invite them now as the US and Europe began to do in the 1960s, drawing migrants to bring down the cost of local labor and undermine the trade unions? Or should we prepare to defend our territories from the outsiders? In that case, we should abandon all hope to develop democracy, as Israel's experience with its Arab population shows.

Would developing robotics, which is currently in a sorry state, help compensate for the lack of workforce and make those territories livable again? What is the role of indigenous Russian people in our country, considering their number will inevitably keep shrinking? Given that Russians have historically been an open people, the prospects might be optimistic. But so far it's unclear.

I can go on and on, especially when it comes to the economy. These questions need to be asked and it's vital to find answers as soon as possible in order to grow and come out on top. Russia needs a new political economy – free from Marxist and liberal dogmas, but something more than the current pragmatism our foreign policy is based on. It must include forward-oriented idealism, a new Russian ideology incorporating our history and philosophical traditions. This echoes the ideas put forward by the academic Pavel Tsygankov.

I believe that this is the ultimate goal of all our research in foreign affairs, political science, economics and philosophy. This task is beyond difficult. We can continue contributing to our society and our country only by breaking our old thinking patterns. But to end on an optimistic note, here's a humorous thought: Isn't it time to recognize that the subject of our studies – foreign affairs, domestic policies, and the economy – is the result of a creative process involving masses and leaders alike? To recognize that it is, in a way, art? To a large degree, it defies explanation and stems from intuition and talent. And so we are like art experts: We talk about it, identify trends and teach the artists – the masses and the leaders – history, which is useful to them. We often get lost in the theoretical, though, coming up with ideas divorced from reality or distorting it by focusing on separate fragments.

Sometimes we do make history: think Evgeny Primakov or Henry Kissinger. But I'd argue they didn't care what approaches to this art history they represented. They drew upon their knowledge, personal experience, moral principles, and intuition. I like the idea of us being a type of art expert, and I believe it can make the daunting task of revising the dogmas a little easier.

Text to Speech by: ResponsiveVoice-NonCommercial licensed under 95x15
website no use cookies, no spying, no tracking
to use the website, we check:
country: US · city: · ip: 18.208.186.139
device: computer · browser: CCBot 2 · platform:
counter: 1 · online:
created and powered by:
RobiYogi.com - Professional Responsive Websites
00:00
00:00
close
 please wait loading data...