Putin and Israel: a complex and multi-layered relationship

Tags: ,,,,, ,, ,, ,,, ,,, , ,

(Note by SFPWP chief editors, 24/12/2015) ~ To all those who see us as “fanatics pro-Putin”, and for those that are blindly “for or against” the Russia Putin era, we publish this interesting article that appeared on “The Saker“, where it is accurately analyzed and documented the presence, influence and/or any hazards of the Zionist movement in Russia, and more generally of the Jewish lobby in the old Soviet Union and today’s Russia, from ancient times until today.

It is an article that in our opinion it must be read, to better understand the geopolitical role of modern Russia, as well as Putin’s geostrategic choices that have done so much enrage (and still do) the Western mafia establishment (maneuvered, as we all well know, behind the scenes by the Israel lobby).

Since the choice of the statesman Putin are never only personal, ideological or confessionals, but they respond to the needs of ‘realpolitik’ of a great nation, aware of the weight that these decisions will have on a global level, we are obliged to learn, understand and investigate in depth, to be able to have a more clear vision of the reality, without prejudices and preconceptions.

Putin and Israel: a complex and multi-layered relationship


(By ‘The Saker’ – 23/12/2015) ~ The recent murder of Samir Kuntar by Israel has, yet again, inflamed the discussion about Putin’s relation to Israel.  This is an immensely complicated topic and those who like simple, canned, “explanations” should stop reading right now.  The truth is, the relationship between Russia and Israel and, even before that, between Jews and Russians would deserve an entire book.  In fact, Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written exactly such a book, it is entitled “200 years together”, but due to the iron grip of the Zionists on the Anglo media, it has still not been translated into English. That should already tell you something right there – an author acclaimed worldwide who got the Nobel Prize for literature cannot get his book translated into English because its contents might undermine the official narrative about Russian-Jewish relations in general and about the role Jews played in Russian 20th century politics in particular!  What other proof of the reality of the subordination of the former British Empire to Zionists interest does one need?

I have already written about this topic in the past and, at the very least, I will ask you to read the following two background articles before continuing to read:

Before looking into some of the idiosyncrasies of the Russian-Israeli relationship I want to stress one very important thing: you should not simply assume that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews in Russia is similar to what it is in the West.  This is not the case.  Without going through a detailed discussion of the emancipation of Jews in the West and their long track from their rabbi-runshtetls to the boardrooms of the biggest western corporations, I will just say that for Russian Jews this process of emancipation happened in a much more violent and catastrophic way.  The second big difference between western Jews and Russian Jews is that roughly between 1917 and 1939 a specific subset of Jews (Bolshevik Jews) were in quasi total control of Russia.  During that period the Bolshevik Jews persecuted Russians and, especially, Orthodox Christians with a truly genocidal hate.  This is a fact of history which most Russians are very much aware of, even if this is still considered crimethink in most western circles.  It is also important to stress here that the Bolshevik Jews persecuted not only Orthodox Christians, but all religious groups, including, by the way, Judaics.  Putin is very much aware of all these facts which he addressed when speaking to a group of Judaics in Moscow:

In the 2nd article mentioned above I discussed these issues and all I want to do know is to show you that Putin is very much aware of this past and that he has the courage and intellectual honesty to remind Russian Jews of it.

The other absolutely crucial fact about the relationship between Russia and Israel is the immigration of Russian Jews to Israel.  Here I will just submit to you a bullet-point list of why this is a crucial factor:

  1. Regardless of whether they ended up in Israel, Austria, Germany, the USA or Israel, the immigration of Russian Jews to Israel made it possible for those Jews who did not want to stay in Russia to leave.  Conversely, those who did not leave stayed by choice.  This means that the vast majority, if not all, of the rabid russophobes and Christianity-hating Jews have left Russia.  Those who stayed in Russia did so because they decided that it was their home.
  2. A large number (some estimates go as high has 20%) of so-called “Jews” who left Russia are not Jewish at all, including some of those who settled in Israel.  The truth is that the economic and social hardships which faced the Soviet society under Brezhnev & Co and Russia under Eltsin made a lot of non-Jewish Russian invent themselves some (non-existing) Jewish origins just to emigrate.  Thus there are many real Russians, as opposed to Russian Jews, in Israel.
  3. As a result of this big immigration there are innumerable personal ties between individuals and families living in Israel and Russia.  This means that when, say, Iraq or Hezbollah rain rockets in Israel there are folks in Russia who are personally concerned about their friends in Israel even if they don’t necessarily approve of Israeli politics.
  4. The so-called “Russian Mafia” is, in reality, mostly a Mafia of Russian Jews.  This is particularly true in the West.  In Russia there are Jewish mobsters, but not really a Jewish mob as such.  Russian and Jewish mobsters get along famously and that also creates, shall we say, strong “business” ties between “Russian” oligarchs and Israel.
  5. Eltsin the country was de-facto ruled by what was called thesemibankirshchina,  the “rule of the Seven Bankers”.  These were the seven top bankers of Russia who owned about 50% of the entire Russian economy.  All of them except one (Potanin) were Jews.
  6. During the Eltisin years, the vast majority of the members of government and, especially, their advisors were Jews.  Jews also were in control of almost all of the mainstream media.  To give you an idea of how prevalent this trend was in the 1990s, here is a (machine translated) list of top-level Jews in Eltsin’s Russia I have found on the Internet: (source: https://goo.gl/jZlazH)

The oligarchs are Jews in order to ensure the re-election of Boris Yeltsin in the next term in the 1996 presidential election:
1991 – 1999
Boris Yeltsin (Eltsin – Jew married to a Jew).
Naina Yeltsin – a Jew.
Adviser to the President on economic issues – Livshits – JEW.
During all the time of Yeltsin’s rule (1991-1999) the majority of his advisers were Jewish.
Head of Presidential Administration Filatov, Chubais, Voloshin, the daughter of the President (a new position of the Jewish authorities), Tatyana Dyachenko (by Jewish law – Halacha, as the daughter of a Jewish – a Jew) .- All the Jews.
All key ministers – JEWS:
Economy Minister – Yasin – Jew
Zam. Minister of Economy – Urinson – Jew
The Minister of Finance – Panskov – Jew
Zam. Minister of Finance – Vavilov – Jew
Chairman of the Central Bank – Paramonov – Jew
Minister of Foreign Affairs – Kozyrev – Jew
Minister of Energy – Shafranik – Jew
Minister of Communications – Bulhak – Jew
Minister of Natural Resources – Danilov– Jew
Minister of Transport – Efimov – Jew
The Minister of Health – Nechayev – Jew
Minister for Science – Saltykov – Jew
Minister of Culture – Sidorov – Jew
mass media
Chairman of the Media – Rodents – Jew
“News” – Golembiovskiy – Jew
“Komsomolskaya Pravda” – Fronin – Jew
“Moskovsky Komsomolets” – Gusev (Drabkin) – Jew
“Arguments and Facts” – Starks – Jew
“Work” – Potapov – Jew
“Moscow News” – Karpinski – Jew
“Kommersant” – Yakovlev (Ginsburg) – Jew
“New Look” – Dodolev – Jew
“Nezavisimaya Gazeta” – Tretyakov – Jew
“Evening Moscow” – Lisin – Jew
“Literary Newspaper” – Udaltsov – Jew
“Publicity” – Izyumov – Jew
“Interlocutor” – Kozlov – Jew
“Rural Life” – Kharlamov – a Jew.
“Top Secret” – Borovik – Jew.
Television and radio:
TV and Radio, “Ostankino” – A. Yakovlev – a Jew.
Russian TV and Radio Company – Poptsov – Jew.
1996-1999 GG – “Seven bankers”.
All Russian finance concentrated in the hands of the Jews.
A country ruled by seven bankers (“seven bankers”):
1.Aven – Jew
2. Berezovsky – a Jew,
3. Gusinsky – a Jew,
4. Potanin (Potanin on different data).
5. Smolensk – Jew
6. Friedman – a Jew,
7. Khodorkovsky – a Jew.
8 Roman Abramovich

The lists of Jews in the Soviet government from 1917-1939 look exactly similar.  You can find them on the Internet yourselves.

In truth, folks who compile such lists are rarely motivated by purely scientific purposes and they often don’t feel constrained by strict rules of evidence.  So it is quite possible that a certain percentage of “Jews” listed above are not Jews at all.  But even with a wide margin of error – you get the picture.  Just as between 1917 and 1939, between 1991 and 1999 the reigns of power in Russia were firmly in Jewish hands, and in both cases, with truly catastrophic consequences. The big difference is that if in the early 20th century the Jews in power were ideological opponents of the Anglo Empire, in the late 20th century the Jews in Russia were practically an extension of the AngloZionist Empire.

Speaking of extensions of the AngloZionist Empire.

I have already explained many times in the past that the candidature of Putin to succeed Eltsin was a compromise reached between the Russian security services and Russian “big money” who pushed Medvedev as a counter-weight to Putin.  I usually refer to the forces backing Putin as “Eurasian Sovereignists” and the forces backing Medvedev as “Atlantic Integrationists”.  The goal of the former is to fully sovereignize Russia and make her a key element in a multi-polar but unified Eurasian continent while the goal of the latter is to be accepted by the AngloZionist Empire as an equal partner and to integrate Russia into the western power structures.  Next is something so important that I will single it out on a separate parapgraph:

The Atlantic Integrationists are still in full control of the Russian financial and banking sector, of all the key economic ministries and government positions, they control the Russian Central Bank and they are, by far, the single biggest threat to the rule of Putin and those supporting him.  Considering that roughly 90% of Russians now support Putin, that means that these Atlantic Integrationists are the single biggest threat to the Russian people and Russia as a whole.

How is that all linked to Israel?  Simple!

Putin inherited a system created by and for the AngloZionist Empire.  He was a compromise candidate between two radically opposed parties and it took him years to first get rid of most of the the Russian (Jewish) oligarchs and then, very gradually, begin cleanup process in which slowly, step by step, the Zionists were booted out of their positions of power.  According to Mikhail Khazin, the balance between these two groups has only recently reached a 50/50 point of (unstable) equilibrium.  That also means that the “Putin people” need to watch their back every day the Good Lord makes because they know that their so-called “colleagues” are willing to stab them in a blink of an eye as soon as they get an opportunity.

I happen to think that the rumors of a coup in Russia are greatly exaggerated.  Not only because Putin does enjoy the support of the “power ministries” (Defense, State Security, Internal Affairs, etc.) but, much more importantly, because of the 90% support he has with the Russian people.  To overthrow a man with such a cult-like following, a man truly loved by the vast majority of people, would be too dangerous.  But that does not mean that the 5th column is not willing to sabotage every effort of Putin and his supporters.

The truth is that Putin has been forced to compromise many, many times.  Here are just a few examples:

The oligarchs: when Putin ridded Russia of the semibankirshchina he did not really crack down on all the oligarchs as such.  He only only got rid of those oligarchs who, like Khodorkovsky, had tried to basically stage a coup against Putin by buying the entire Duma.  The oligarchs were told “stay out of politics and I will leave you alone”.  The deal is still on today.

The economy: even in his last speech Putin had to declare that he fully supports the Central Bank and the economic Ministers of the Medvedev government.  Considering that literally ALL Putin allies openly and vocally are screaming bloody murder about the way the Russian economy is mismanaged, this is clearly a coerced statement and not something he believes in.  By the way, I am observing a systematic vilification campaign on the central Russian TV channels against the Central Bank and the economic Ministers and this cannot be a coincidence.  I predict that Putin is preparing a purge of these circles, but that he needs to line up all his ducks in a row before taking action, especially by inflaming the public opinion against them.  Right now the Russian economy is still run by IMF-stooges, by “Washington consensus” types, hence their crazy policy on interest rates, on buying US obligations, on keeping inflation low, etc. etc. etc.  Putin, by conviction, is not what I would call a “socialist” but he is most definitely a proponent of “social markets” and somebody who is trying hard to decouple Russia from the western financial system, and not play by the rules of the Empire.

Foreign policy: right up until Putin’s latest re-election when finally Russia began to have a fairly consistent foreign policy, the policy of Russia has been one of zigs followed by zags.  This was especially true during the times when Medvedev was in charge of the Presidency and when Iran and Libya were betrayed by Russia at the UNSC  (something Putin openly called “stupid”).

Personalities: remember the hyper-corrupt Minister of Defense Serdiukov?  Guess what? He has still not been formally charged with anything.  Even the woman he did most of his dirty dealing with still lives in her luxurious apparent in Moscow.  What does this tell us?  That even when Putin got the hard proof of Serdiukov’s malfeasance he had enough power to replace him by Shoigu, but not enough to power to stick such high-profile “Atlantic Integrationists” into jail.

Nazi occupied Ukraine: Putin had enough control over the government to provide the vital Voentorg and to even send some special forces and artillery strikes across the border to help the Novorussians, but he could not force the economic Ministries to use the Russian economic might to strangle the Ukrainian economy.  This resulted in Russia sending artillery shells across the border in Saur Mogila and (basically free) energy across the border to Kiev.

Russophobic propaganda: when recently some third-rate sport journalist, Alexei Andronov, posted a viciously anti-Russian comment in Twitter he was criticized for that by Alexei Pushkov, a journalist who is also the head of the foreign-affairs committee in the State Duma on his own TV show “Postscriptum”.  The TV channel which airs the show, TV Tsentr, the censored the segment criticizing Andronov.  Then, the famous Russian movie director Nikita Mikhailkov recoded an entire show discussing this event, the TV channel running his show, TV Rossia, also censored the entire episode.  As for the director of the TV channel where Andronov works, Tina Kandelaki, she gave Andronov her full support.  Bottom line: while Putin did immensely improve the overall quality of the Russian media, the russophobes are still very influential and can spew their hateful venom in total impunity.

I could continue to list example after example, but I think you get the idea: Putin is a very good man in charge of a very bad system.

Now let’s really get back to Syria, Hezbollah and the murder of Samir Kuntar.

First, consider that the decision to militarily intervene in the Syrian war was already a controversial one.  Putin pulled this one off by doing two things: explaining to the Russian people that it was better to deal with the terrorists “there” (in Syria) rather than “here” (in Russia) and by promising that he would not send in ground forces.  When Daesh and the Turks fulfilled the promise made by Obama and Biden and blew a Russian airliner and, later, a SU-24 bomber out of the sky, the Russian public continued to support Putin, but most Russians, including myself, were acutely aware of the dangers of the situation.  At the end of the day, it is Putin’s personal “street cred” which allowed him to stay the course in spite of real fears.

Second, it is clear that Putin and Netanyahu struck a deal when the latter traveled to Moscow: the Israelis don’t interfere in Russian operations in support of the Syrians as long as the Russians don’t interfere in the combat operations between Israel and Hezbollah.  This made it possible for both sides to pursue their main interest even if it was at the cost of their secondary objectives.  You don’t like that deal and you question its morality?  Good!  So do I.  I am, in fact, intensely uncomfortable with it, but I expect no less from ruthless realpolitik practitioners like Putin and Bibi Netanyahu (good thing you and I are not in power!).

There is, by the way, another precedent which I am just as uncomfortable with: the Russian total backing for the Egyptian military’s bloody repression against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.  I accept the argument that to support the Egyptian military made sense in the context of the war in Syria, but the ethnics of supporting such a regime intensely bother me.  This is why Putin is a ruthless but successful politician and I am a little quasi-irrelevant blogger: it takes a ruthless bear to fight ruthless wolves.

This being said, let’s not pretend like Hezbollah is any less cynical when needed. I remind you all that when Imad Mugniyeh was murdered in Damascus by the very same Israelis in an operation which could only have been executed with very high level accomplices in the Assad regime, Hezbollah promised “retaliation” but never peeped a single word against the regime.  Neither did Hezbollah have any objections when Assad was torturing Muslims on behalf of the US CIA for the infamous “rendition” program.

As for Putin, he simply has other priorities than to protect Hezbollah or fight Israel:

Surviving inside Russia and not being overthrown by the still very powerful Zionist Power Configuration (to use James Petras’ expression) in Russia being a top one. Another priority would be not to give his (internal and external) enemies the political argument that “Russia is attacking Israel”.  Not having a shooting match with Israel and not to have the small and isolated Russian contingent have to fight on two fronts would be crucial too.  Ditto not to be accused of having the Russians contingent turned into the de-facto “Hezbollah Air Force” like the US is the “Daesh Air Force”.  These are all obvious priorities for Putin.

And then this: while the Russian S-400s can easily shoot down any Israeli aircraft, the Russian AirSpace contingent does not have the materials means to fight Israel or, even less so, NATO and CENTCOM. As for Russia, she most definitely cannot pick a fight with Israel not due to the inherent power of this tiny Zionist Entity, but due to the fact that the US Empire has been thoroughly taken under Zionist control.  So those Americans who now complain that Putin “does not have the courage” to take on Israel should first ask themselves how it is that Israel seems to have transformed the USA and Europe in a voiceless Zionist protectorate and what they are doing to liberate themselves from that yoke!

Speaking of the West: one ought to compare the position of the AngloZionist Empire one one hand, and of many influential Russian Jews (in Russia and in Israel) about the war in the Ukraine.  While the West has been in total support of the Nazi regime in Kiev, many Russian Jews, especially the very famous ones like Vladimir Soloviev, have taken a categorically anti-Nazi position.  And whilein Israel the popularity of Putin and Russia is still extremely low, most of the anti-Putin opposition in Russia is not formed of Jews.  Finally, the Russian general public is, sadly, extremely poorly informed of the horrors perpetrated by the Zionist regime against the Palestinian people while Israelis and dual-nationals (like Evgenii Satanovskii or Avigdor Eskin) are constantly peddling the notion that “we Russians and Israelis are the only ones standing up to Muslim terrorism” thereby capitalizing to the max by the current war between Russia and Daesh.  In other words, Putin would have one hell of a tough time selling the shooting down of an Israeli aircraft to the Russian general public.

I understand that none of the above will have any traction with bona fide Jew-haters or with those who like simple, black and white, arguments.  For them Putin will forever remain a sellout, an eternal shabbos-goy or a puppet of the international financiers.  Frankly, I am not addressing this to them.  But there are those who are sincerely bewildered and confused about Russian policies which do appear to be confusing or even contradictory.  To them I will conclude by saying this:

Putin advances his cause one step a a time and he knows how to wait and let events take on their own dynamic.  He is also acutely aware that he is literally fighting with one hand tied behind his back and the other one busy defending against external and internal enemies (the latter being far more dangerous) at the same time.  I am sure that Putin fully realizes that,at least potentially, his policy of resistance, sovereignization and liberation can lead to an intercontinental nuclear war and that Russia is currently still weaker than the AngloZionist Empire.  Just as in the times of Stolypin, Russia desperately needs a few more years of peace to develop herself and fully stand up.  This is most definitely not the time for a frontal confrontation with the Empire.  Russia vitally needs *peace* and *time*: peace in the Ukraine, peace in Europe and, yes, peace in the Middle-East.  Alas, the latter is not an option and, when cornered, Putin did take the decision to go to war.  And I am absolutely and categorically certain that if the Empire attacks Russia (from Turkey or elsewhere), Russia will fight back.  Russia is willing to go to war if needed, but she will do her utmost to avoid it.  This is the price Russia pays for being the weaker side.  The good news is that Russia is getting stronger with every passing day, while the Empire is getting weaker.  And the power of the AngloZionists and their 5th column in Russia is also weakening with every passing day.  But this process will take time.

The big event to watch for is a crackdown on the Central Bank and the economy ministries of the government.  Everybody in Russia is waiting for this, Putin even got directly asked this question recently, but he is sill denying it all and saying that he fully supports these saboteurs.  Considering Putin’s track, it is plain stupid to say that he really supports them – this is clearly a delaying tactic until the time is right.

Make no mistake.  There is no big love between Russia and Israel.  But neither is there a lot of hostility, at least not on the Russian side.  Most Russian are aware of the ugly role Jews played already twice in Russian history, but this does not translate into the kind of hostility towards Jews which you would see, for example, in the Ukraine. At most Russians can be suspicious of Jewish *power* but rarely does this translate into hostility for Jews as regular people.  Some of the most adored Russian public figures, like the bard Vladimir Vysotskii, had Jewish blood.  Most Russians also make a distinction between “their” Jews (russophobic Jews in the West) and “our” Jews (Russian Jews who love Russia).  But since russophobia has also been widespread amongst Russian elites, before and after the Revolution, it can hardly be described as a Jewish phenomenon.  The Russian culture having always been multi-national and multi-ethnic does not really separate people by their ethnicity but judges them much more readily by their actions and ideas.  For all these reasons, the hatred of the “Yid” is much more a Ukrainian nationalist phenomenon than a Russian one.

And while most Russians would not want to have a return to power of a new version of the Bolshevik commissars or the “democratic” oligarchs inside Russia, there is a closeness and an anti-Nazi solidarity between Russians and Israelis which should not be dismissed.

Concerning Palestine, Russia will support all the relevant UN Resolutions and thus be the typical and rather unimaginative “two state solution” proponent.  At most, Russia will “deplore” or “regret” the abuses of Palestinians by Israelis, but Russia will never become a systematic defender of Palestinian rights like Iran or Hezbollah simply because the future of Palestine is not a Russian priority.

I hope that the above is helpful in understanding why Russia does not take any action to protect Hezbollah against the Israelis (and why she will not prevent Hezbollah from retaliating from Syria, should Hezbollah take that decision).  Simply put: there is no compelling internal or external reason for Russia to get directly involved in this while there are plenty of compelling internal and external reasons for Russia to stay out.  If in the past the USSR supported the PLO on both ideological and geostrategic reasons, modern Russia today will not follow the same paradigm.  Besides, it’s not like Fatah or Hamas are attractive, or even credible, partners for Russia, being in bed as they are with Daesh.  Ditto for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

As for Hezbollah, it is not like they need Russia’s protection.  Symbolic as they may be, the murders of Imad Mugniyeh or Samir Kuntar will in no way weaken the Resistance.  In fact, if the history of the murder of Abbas al-Musawi teaches us anything, it is that sometimes Israelis murder a Hezbollah leader only to find out that the next one is even a more formidable adversary.  God willing, this will also be the case this time.

The Saker


Is Putin Still a Freemason?

Today, the webmaster of the Blog “Kulissenriss” wrote me that acc. to the Tomlinson-link in my latest article, Putin is no longer a Royal Arch Mason. So I have tried to penetrate somewhat deeper into the matter – and will leave it to my readers to decide for themselves what that man really is.

I have several times referred to Vladimir Putin as a Royal Arch Freemason. This information is derived from an abstract  from Richard Tomlinson´s Book The big Breachfrom 2001 – which nobody has disputed, and which brought the MI6 into big trouble.

Richard Tomlinson was initiated in  the Royal Arch as were all MI6 members – which was apparently identical with the KGB: Vladimir Putin and the other KGB Royal Arch Freemasons  were educated alongside with Tomlinson. Like with Tomlinson, the MI6 in 1993 wanted to get rid of Putin when it no longer needed him.
The abstract (not written by Tomlinson) concludes: “What is known is that Vladimir Putin is no longer a Royal Arch Freemasonry member. Can the same be said to be true of Richard Tomlinson?” No explanation given for that statement.putin-masonic-handshake







Left above : Putin greets Tymosheno with Masonic handshake. Right above : Putin shows Masonic “sign of preservation”.

Another Blog “John Scarlett” (about – not by – Tomlinson´s and Putin´s MI6 teacher, John Scarlett)  brings a comment on 9 Febr. 2007 from a person claiming to have been initiated to anoint Vladimir Putin, who in 1979 was chosen to be the Illuminati Antichrist. He was anointed in 1993 – and “left the Royal Arch in 1994″.However the anointer claims that after Putin was anointed, his career sped upwards – and that only began in 1994! At that time Putin had been through a severe Royal Arch brainwashing – acc. to Tomlinson.

Henry Makow 11 June 2012: “It appears that “Red Ox” was also recruited by KGB at an early stage. He sees MI-6 & KGB as essentially one and their rivalry as Masonic office politics. He says most members of these agencies are so compartmentalized, they haven’t a clue of the bigger picture, i.e. both agencies serve Rothschilds.”

Did Putin really stop being a Royal Arch mason in 1994, as his career began? He would have lost invaluable information from the MI6/KGB society – and would a “traitor” who had broken his Illuminati oath be able to make career in the Royal Arch dominated KGB – which he did until made President in 1999? Today he is the overall boss of the KGB successor, the FSB (or its subordinate?). Has he really freed himself from the Pharisaic Rothschild /Jesuit  grip?

putin necktieTexe Marrs in his Codex Magica tells in his Flaming Ring of Fire: “Putin wears a Masonic neck tie. The triangles, on Putin´s tie and on the shirt collar, have their point, or spear, downward,toward the realm that is the controlling force of Masonry.

In terms of the secret order or secret society, it symbolizes sacrifice of the individual to the common good of the organization.

The neck tie Putin wears has Illuminist meaning. The X of Osiris is prominent in the design as is the two triangles—one pointing up, the other down—inside a diamond.”

Masons are slaves of their rituals which mostly betray them. Putin staked much on making the Sochi Winter OL games – the most expensive ever – a show of the power of his new Russia – as have former dictators also done.
So, do events at the Sochi games betray Putin as a Mason maybe even with a special role?

The following photos are from The Mountain Flame  and The World Truth 14 Febr. 2014 :prometheus-rockefeller-thumb

Right: Prometheus in front of the Rockefeller  Center, New York.
The World Truth 14 Febr. 2014 writes: “Why Sochi?  According to Greek mythology, Prometheus was held captive off the cliffs of Sochi where while chained to a rock, an eagle pecked out his liver only for it to grow back to be pecked out again.  His crime?  Stealing fire from the Gods and giving it to humans, thusilluminating them.  Basically, he is just another version of Lucifer.”

The double headed eagle below was flashed on the opening ceremony at times. It goes back to the Byzantine Empires, and can arguably get traced back even further to the secret schools of mystery (Horus was double headed) and also the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (As above so below). It was the coats of arms of the Romanow emperors/Russian empire for 300 years ( thus showing Putins ambition – Eurasia). The Freemasons call the double headed eagle the Eagle of Lagash, and some Freemason websites claim that Scottish Freemason

sotchi-doubleheaded-eaglesotchi-phoenix-roubleAlbert Pike once said: “As the Adept knows, the double-headed eagle is a Hermetic Symbol, representing the Divine Generative Potency, and Productive Capacity of Nature – like the human figure with two heads, one male the other female – God and Nature; the Egypian Osiris and Isis.”

Right: The economist brings the double-headed Phoenix rising from the ashes on the Russian Ruble to announce the one world currency



Left: The Pentagram as Sotchi logo

sotchi london*

 sotchi phoenis2





Right above: Phoenix rising from the ashes during the 2012 London summer Olympic Games.
sotchi1Right below: At the Sochi opening ceremony, Phoenix rose again and again.



Left: Fireworks form eyebrows of Lucifer/Horus´all-seeing Masonic eye just as in London.





 Above: The eye once more

Left below: Illuminati Pyramids with symbols I cannot interpret. Below right:



Left: Russian troika pulling the “Ring of Fire”.
In 1980, the US boycotted the Olympic summer games in Moscow. In 2014, the Russian troika takes the broken red one of the olympic rings back to Russia.


But Texe Marrs in his Codex Magica tells aboutthe Flaming Ring of Fire: Former Mason Bill Schnoebelen writes:  “Let’s face it, theMasonic tie tacks and rings that so many Masons wear proudly to their churches on Sunday are sexual idols.”
The Gods, like Baal, of all pagan nations around Israel were all sexual idols. Yet all these Masons are flaunting both their idols and their (church) membership.

Left above: Moon cult: Semiramis/Nimrod, Babylon. Right Above: The fallen Morning Star (Isaiah 14:12-14), Venus/Lucifer is in place on the one world pyramid with the capstone now in place in the sea of peoples.

sochi russia


Right; Slaves in scarlet environment (Revelation 17) are building rings of fire/wheels for some machinery (one-world-state?)

And now it becomes really uncanny. I will leave it to you to decide whether this video is over-interpreted. I am afraid not.

This entry was posted in euromed, english. Bookmark the permalink.

Vladimir Putin: The New World Order Worships Satan

Kevin Barrett: “It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.”

"So, you want to worship Satan? By all means, but leave Russia out of it."

…by Jonas E. Alexis


During the Cold War, the United States and much of the West argued that the Soviet Union was a “godless nation.”[1] Last year, Vladimir Putin took that pendulum, swung it on the other direction, and landed it on the Zionist regime. As Patrick Buchanan put it then, “In the new war of beliefs, Putin is saying, it is Russia that is on God’s side. The West is Gomorrah.”[2] Putin said:

“Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.”[3]

If you think that Putin is just pulling your leg here, then get this:

The Washington Times reported then:

“In his state of the nation address, Mr. Putin also portrayed Russia as a staunch defender of ‘traditional values’ against what he depicted as the morally bankrupt West. Social and religious conservatism, the former KGB officer insisted, is the only way to prevent the world from slipping into ‘chaotic darkness.’

“As part of this defense of ‘Christian values,’ Russia has adopted a law banning “homosexual propaganda” and another that makes it a criminal offense to ‘insult’ the religious sensibilities of believers…

“Although Mr. Putin has never made a secret of what he says is his deep Christian faith, his first decade in power was largely free of overtly religious rhetoric. Little or no attempt was made to impose a set of values on Russians or lecture to the West on morals.”[4]

Certainly Putin put the moral equation back on the table. Kevin Barrett declared that Putin here was trying to “put the fear of God in the New World Order.” Barrett moved on to make the forceful argument that much of the Zionist establishment in the West is afraid of Putin because the establishment leaves in fear. “Russian President Putin is resisting,” said Barrett. “That is why the Western propaganda machine is calling him names.” Barrett continued to argue cogently:

“It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.

“Anyone who doubts this should run the name ‘Lt. Col. Michael Aquino’ through a search engine. Aquino, an avowed Satanist and credibly-accused mass child abuser, was rewarded for his crimes against children with an appointment as Chief of Psychological Warfare for the US military…

“The shock troops of the NWO’s war against religion and tradition (and Russia and Iran) are the neoconservatives. Operation Gladio terrorist Michael Ledeen explains:

“‘Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace … We must destroy them to advance our historic mission.’

“Putin is stopping New World Order ‘creative destruction’ in Syria and Ukraine. He is part of a growing coalition opposing the NWO – not just religious traditionalists, but also progressive anti-globalization forces, including Hugo Chavez inspired anti-imperialists in Latin America.”

Kudos for Barrett here. The regime proved Putin right by applauding the Pussy Riot,[5] a Trotskyite group that ended up having sex (literal pornography) at the Moscow National Museum. (We have discussed this issue in the past.) As always, Neocons like Seth Mandel of Commentary were on the front line defending their brethren.[6]

But the crucial point here is that Putin, like Emmanuel Kant and even John Adams and others, understands that a nation cannot exist without objective morality, and objective morality cannot exist without Logos,[7] the essence and sustainer of the moral universe.

In that sense, and whether he notices it or not, Putin was implicitly or indirectly attacking the Neo-Darwinian ideology, which states that objective morality is an illusion and has no metaphysical basis. It is here that we find again that Neo-Darwinian metaphysics is intellectually useless and worthless because it denies the very essence of a moral universe.

As we have noted in the past, serious Darwinists agree that objective morality is an illusion. The noted biology philosopher Michael Ruse once again said that “there are no grounds whatsoever for being good…. Morality is flimflam.”[8] Yet like his intellectual antecedent Charles Darwin, Ruse ends up contradicting himself in the very next sentence by saying,

“Does this mean that you can just go out and rape and pillage, behave like an ancient Roman grabbing Sabine women? Not at all. I said that there are no grounds for being good. It doesn’t follow that you should be bad.”[9]

Well, duh! If there are no grounds for objective morality, then good and bad are also illusion. There is not such a thing as rape or bad behavior. What is good for you may not be good for me, and there is no way of adjudicating competing explanations. In that kind of world, might makes right. Ruse does not really have a problem with this argument here. In fact, he moves on to say that morality

“is something forged in the struggle for existence and reproduction, something fashioned by natural selection. It is as much a natural human adaptation as our ears or noses or teeth or penises or vaginas. It works and it has no meaning over and above this. If all future food were Pablum, we would probably be better off without teeth.

“Morality is just a matter of emotions, like liking ice cream and sex and hating toothache and marking student papers. But it is, and has to be, a funny kind of emotion. It has to pretend that it is not that at all! If we thought that morality was no more than liking or not liking spinach, then pretty quickly it would break down.

“Before long, we would find ourselves saying something like: ‘Well, morality is a jolly good thing from a personal point of view. When I am hungry or sick, I can rely on my fellow humans to help me. But really it is all bullshit, so when they need help I can and should avoid putting myself out. There is nothing there for me.’ The trouble is that everyone would start saying this, and so very quickly there would be no morality and society would collapse and each and every one of us would suffer

“So morality has to come across as something that is more than emotion. It has to appear to be objective, even though really it is subjective.”[10]

Ruse, like some genetic theorists, really believes that “morality is an illusion put in place by your genes to make you a social cooperator…”[11]

This, by the way, is logically congruent with Darwin’s survival of the fittest. And survival of the fittest is logically congruent with Zionism. If evolutionary theory “explains how warfare contributed to fitness in the course of the evolution of Homo sapiens,” as scholar Bradley A. Thayer maintains,[12] then how can a serious Darwinist say that social Darwinism or even Zionism is really bad on a consistent and logical basis?

Thayer, of course, struggles mightily to rationally defend the thesis that “Warfare contributes to fitness”[13] and that “people wage war to gain and defend resources”[14] while maintaining that social Darwinists were wrong in taking social Darwinism to its logical conclusion. He says that “social Darwinists perverted Charles Darwin’s argument” and

“distorted evolutionary explanations because they misunderstood Darwin’s ideas and were ignorant of or consciously chose to ignore the naturalistic fallacy. Those who use evolutionary theory to explain aspects of human behavior must recall the social Darwinists’ errors. Doing so makes it possible not only to avoid repeating errors but also to advance scientific understanding.”[15]

But Thayer moves on to make this argument:

“The ultimate causation for warfare is anchored in Darwinian natural selection and inclusive fitness….warfare can increase both the absolute and relative fitness of humans…From the classical Darwinian perspective, warfare contributes to fitness because individuals who wage war successfully are better able to survive and reproduce.”[16]

Thayer repeats this thesis over and over in the course of the book:

“An ultimate causal explanation for warfare based in evolutionary theory begins with the recognition that warfare contributes to fitness in certain circumstances because successful warfare lets the winner acquire resources.

“For evolutionary biology, a resource is any material substance that has the potential to increase the individual’s ability to survive or reproduce. As such it may be food, shelter, or territory, especially high-quality soil or wild foods; abundant firewood; or territory free of dangerous animals, such as lions, or  insect infestations, or disease; and also status coalition allies, and members of the opposite sex.”[17]

And then this: “Warfare might be necessary then for offensive purposes, to plunder resources from others. In these circumstances, an individual becomes fitter if he can successfully attack to take the resources of others.”[18]

Thayer cites evolutionary theorist William Durham saying that

“War is one means by which individuals ‘may improve the material conditions of their lives and thereby increae their ability to survive and reproduce…Thus successful warfare would help the tribe gain resources, and for a swidden agricultural economy land is critically important.”[19]

So, is Thayer really against social Darwinism? Ideologically, yes. Consistently and logically? No. I honestly don’t blame him, for his intellectual grandfather could not solve that problem either and had to live in contradiction until his dying day. Darwin declared at the end of his Origin of Species:

“Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.”[20]

Correct me if I am wrong here: isn’t he saying that war and famine and death are things that will get the higher animals ahead?

Scholars of all stripes agree that this is Darwin at his best. Yet when social Darwinists took his thesis and spread it across the political spectrum, Darwin disagreed![21]

If the Dreadful Few are in the struggle for survival, then the Goyim must swiftly be eliminated. That is certainly consistent with Darwin’s grand scheme. If people cannot see this and try to avoid this vital contradiction, then you can be sure that they are not to be taken seriously or they do not understand logic.

So, when people are trying to maintain an objective morality by either appealing to the so-called “evolutionary theory” or even DNA, then you can be sure that those people either are out of touch with the scholarly literature, are not well equipped to understand or articulate their own position, or are just deliberately lying.

Furthermore, to appeal to reciprocal altruism to prove objective morality, a central protocol in Darwin’s grand scheme,[22] is also a dead end because the life of Mother Theresa and countless other examples prove that this idea will not work. I was hoping that modern Darwinists would make some good improvement on this warfare theory, but so far virtually everyone has failed.

I am certainly not asking people to drop their cherished belief. In fact, there are many people who believe in the tooth fairy. But so long that this neo-Darwinian ideology remains intellectually stupid and morally indefensible, they can leave me out of it.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

 Going back to Putin, he said in 2013:

“People in many European countries are ashamed, and are afraid of talking about their religious convictions. [Religious] holidays are being taken away or called something else, shamefully hiding the essence of the holiday.”[23]

The Zionist regime, of course, made the false accusation that Putin was persecuting homosexuals. But Putin moved on to diffuse the regime’s silly argument this way: “We need to respect the rights of minorities to be different, but the rights of the majority should not be in question.”[24]

So, yes, Patrick Buchanan. Putin is one of us. Any serious politician who stands against the Mephistophelian establishment is one of us. As Friedrich Hansen of Asia Times put it,

“Make no mistake, Putin is not targeting homosexuals, as he made clear with his welcoming them to the Sotchi Olympics. It also seems only fair to remind Western readers that ever since the 1980s, Sotchi has been the center of Russia with a vibrant homosexual subculture. Rather, Putin is addressing the whole gamut of post-modern incarnations of the ‘sex and drugs’ revolution: binge drinking of both genders until the doctors move in, elite illicit drug use, unmanageable crime rates, surging divorce numbers, Hook-Up sex on campus, out of wedlock births, fathers and mothers in puberty, abortion on demand, public nudism and human copulation in parks, gay promiscuity with a good conscience, swinger clubs and darkrooms, ruthless Internet dating and pornography and what have you.”[25]

How does the regime respond? Well, you know the drill. Owen Matthews, a useful idiot, declared in the Spectator that Putin has a “new plan for world domination”![26] In order to slander Putin, Matthews indirectly linked him with Willi Munzenberg, a revolutionary Jew who wanted to take the Western world to perdition at any cost. Munzenberg was so passionate about his revolutionary goal that he wrote:

We must organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western Civilization stink! Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.”

When Putin said that Russia will “defend traditional values that have made up the spiritual and moral foundation of civilisation in every nation for thousands of years,” Matthews declared that Putin “is on to something.” What is it? Matthews told us:

“Putin’s new mission goes deeper than political opportunism. Like the old Communist International, or Comintern, in its day, Moscow is again building an international ideological alliance.”[27]

He again emphasized this point so that readers could get it: “And again, like the Comintern, Putin appears convinced that he is embarking on a world-historical mission.”[28] He moved on to talking about “Putin’s conservative Comintern.”

At the other end of the political spectrum, David Cameron likened Putin to Hitler.[29] John McCain, Lindsey Graham, among other usual suspects, have all placed Putin and Hitler on equal footing.[30]

Historian Paul Johnson (sad to say) even went so far as to say that Putin and Hitler are basically two sides of the same coin. Johnson said that Putin

“believes in a strong Stalinist state. His goal is to reverse the events of 1989–the end of the Soviet state and dissolution of its enormous empire. He seeks to do this by using what remains of Russia’s Stalinist heritage: the military, a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons and immense resources of natural gas and other forms of energy.”[31]

Johnson is sad because “there is no Churchillian voice to sound the alarm and call the democratic world to action.”[32]

Johnson has got to be kidding. What he ends up saying is that someone like Churchill needs to step up and start lying to the West about Putin. It is so sad to read silly comments such as this by a good historian like Johnson.

But the real question is this: why do the regime and their puppets hate Putin so much? Well, Putin suggested back in 2013 the Soviet government was guided by a dark force whose “ideological goggles and faulty ideological perceptions collapsed.”[33]

“The first Soviet government,” Putin added, “was 80-85 percent Jewish.”[34] Sounds like Putin has read Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together. If so, then it seems clear that he will continue to challenge the Zionist regime. Perhaps Putin has been encouraged by Solzhenitsyn’s bravery. It was Solzhenitsyn who said:

“And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: will he remain a witting servant of the lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?”[35]

Perhaps Putin is saying enough is enough. And this maybe one reason why nearly all the major news outlets have been relentlessly slandering him. Kevin Barrett ended up his excellent article saying, “God bless President Putin, who is putting the fear of God into the New World Order.” Let us hope that he will never be weary in well doing, for in due season he shall reap, if he faints not.

[1] Actually it was a Marxist/Leninist state.

[2] Patrick J. Buchanan, “Vladimir Putin, Christian Crusader?,” American Conservative, April 4, 2014.

[3] Marc Bennetts, “Who’s ‘godless’ now? Russia says it’s U.S.,” Washington Times, January 28, 2014.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Peter Pomerantsev, “For God and Putin,” Newsweek, September 10, 2012.

[6] Seth Mandel, Contentions: Putin Vs. the Punk Rockers,” Commentary, August 17, 2012.

[7] E. Michael Jones has made this very point in his article “Ethnos Needs Logos: or Why I spent Three Days in Guadalajara Trying to Convince David Duke to Become a Catholic,” Culture Wars, June 2015.

[8] Michael Ruse, “God is dead. Long live morality,” Guardian, March 15, 2010.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and International Relations: On the Evolutionary Origins of War and Ethnic Conflict(Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 96.

[13] Ibid., 99, 100, 107, 114.

[14] Ibid., 99.

[15] Ibid., 102.

[16] Ibid., 103, 104.

[17] Ibid., 108.

[18] Ibid., 109.

[19] Ibid. 110, 111.

[20] Darwin, Origin of Species, 459.

[21] For a decent historical study on this, see for example Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution(Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1962). Darwin was not as open-minded as people thought he was. “Former Darwin enthusiast St. George Mivart published anonymous articles critiquing Darwin’s theory. A gifted zoologist, Mivart would eventually publish a volume titled The Genesis of Species, an influential book that raised serious questions about the limits of natural selection, especially in its application to man. Far from rejecting Darwin wholesale, Mivart continued to embrace evolution and believe that the physical capacities of human beings had developed from the lower animals. But he continued to insist—like [Alfred] Wallace—that man was radically unique from the rest of creation and had a soul. Egged on by Thomas Huxley, Darwin became increasingly bitter over his former disciple’s criticisms, despite Mivart’s attempts to be personable in private correspondence and his public praise of the ‘invaluable labours and active brains of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace.” John G. West, Darwin Day in America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science (Wilmington: ISI Books, 2007).

[22] See Denis L. Krebs, The Origins of Morality (New York: Oxford University, 2011), 41-42.

[23] Neil Buckley, “Putin urges Russians to return to values of religion,” Financial Times, September 19, 2013.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Friedrich Hansen, “Putin Stands Up to Western Decadence,” Asia Times, February 28, 2014.

[26] Owen Matthews, “Vladimir Putin’s new plan for world domination,” Spectator, February 22, 2014.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Owen Jones, “David Cameron and the cynicism of comparing Putin to Hitler,” Guardian, September 3, 2014.

[30] Michael Kelley, “11 Prominent People Who Compared Putin To Hitler,” Business Insider, May 23, 2014.

[31] Paul Johnson, “Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler?,” Forbes, April 16, 2014.

[32] Ibid.

[33] “Putin: First Soviet government was mostly Jewish,” Jerusalem Post, June 20, 2013.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Solzhenitsyn Reader (Wilmington: ISI Books, 2007), 558.


Putin outlaws Holocaust® Denial in Russia

Putin, Vladimir-Listens to Rabbi.jpg (1)RECEIVING THE WORD — Russian President Vladimir Putin listens intently as Moscow’s Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar explains Hebrew law to him during a 2013 visit to the new Jewish Museum in the Muscovite capital. Putin personally donated one month of his salary towards construction of the museum, thought to be the largest of its kind in the world.

MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law [May 5] making the denial of [alleged National Socialist] crimes and distortion of the Soviet Union’s role in the World War II a criminal offense punishable by up to five years in jail.

The law, described by critics as an attempt to curb freedom of expression to appease conservative Russians, the ex-KGB spy’s main support base, also criminalizes the public desecration of [Soviet] war memorials.

Risky to dispute Soviet WWII role

The Kremlin has used World War II as a pillar to unite a society that Putin has said lost its moral bearings following the 1991 Soviet collapse.

It has become increasingly risky for Russians to dispute an official line that glorifies the wartime achievements of the Soviet leadership and plays down its errors.

The new law would ban “wittingly spreading false information about the activity of the USSR during the years of World War II.”

Russian officials and media have raised the specter of [National Socialist] Germany repeatedly during Moscow’s confrontation with the West over Ukraine, calling the overthrow of a Russian-allied president in February a coup carried out in part by “neo-Nazi” forces.

TV channel taken down
for questioning Leningrad siege

Independent channel Dozhd (TV Rain) was taken off the air earlier this year after asking viewers whether Leningrad, now St Petersburg, should have been given to German troops to save lives during its 872-day siege during World War II.

In a comment posted when the legislation was first introduced, veteran TV host Vladimir Posner said he believed its aim was “to shut the mouths of journalists, historians and writers.”

He said he feared it would “practically ban criticism of Stalin” for “grave mistakes that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of our soldiers.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: