Evil Empire or Russia Consecrated?

PAPER: After 17 Years in Power, Putin has a ‘$200 Billion Fortune, 58 Planes and Helicopters and 20 Palaces and Country Retreats’

..................
IBTimes raised the question of Putin’s wealth last week, pointing out that Browder spoke to Fareed Zakaria GPS in 2015, claiming that Putin’s years in power have led him to gain quite a fortune.

‘I believe that it’s $200 billion,’ he said at the time. ‘After 14 years in power of Russia, and the amount of money that the country has made, and the amount of money that hasn’t been spent on schools and roads and hospitals and so on, all that money is in property, bank – Swiss bank accounts – shares, hedge funds, managed for Putin and his cronies.’

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...anes-helicopters-20-palaces-country-retreats/

 

Was not the Yeltsin presidency the true era of cronyism in the former Soviet Union. Putin is perceived to have brought that to an end and the reality is that the Russian economy has prospered considerably since. The Russian people seem reasonably content with their lot.

This article is quite short and even shorter on any verifiable information. Why would people believe mere opinion at a time of unprecedented anti-Russian propaganda (the media actually gave Stalin a fairly good press at the time of his widest slaughter) when Russia is blamed for everything that goes wrong by a Western political elite unprepared to take any responsibility whatsoever for the gigantic mistakes they have made?

 

Bill Browder is the source of this fake news. Bill Browder is the grandson of Earl Browder, the former leader of the Communist Party USA. Browder was one of the corporate raiders who was sent into Russia to loot Russian wealth following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Putin kicked him and the rest of the Western oligarch leeches out and regained control of Russia for Russians. Browder has had an axe to grind ever since.

 

The reason the West has such a demonic hatred of Putin personally is not because he is a "killer" which is an absolutely unsubstantiated charge, but rather because he almost singlehandedly took back control of Russia for Russians. Russian patriots like Putin had to watch Orthodox Russia suffer two great defeats during the 20th Century: the first was the overthrow of Christian Russia by a bunch of militant atheists in 1917 (using the same tactics that their descendants like Victoria Nuland and George Soros use today to affect revolution). The second was the looting of Russian wealth by Western oligarchs following the disorder and chaos that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. Putin, and a group of Russian patriots in the intelligence and military communities in Russia, decided that they were not going to watch Russia dismantled and looted by foreign agents within their country. They acted forcefully against the Western looters and took back Russia piece by piece. When these same Western thieves like Browder whine and complain about Putin being a "killer" what they really mean is that Putin killed their chances of controlling Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

Ah yes, Mr. Putin, the little lambie pie! The trouble is with all of these dyed in the wool dictator types, due mainly to cultural inheritance of such personalities long established throughout that history, is they are mostly defensive reactionaries and thus operate out of fear or dominant positioning mostly. But then, given their historical realities, who can blame them.....esp. without a conversion experience which it seems these days no one is praying for any longer as so desired by the Mother. Looks like Mr. Trump presents a bit of a conundrum for Mr. Putin and the Russians don't like uncertainty especially when they are already on their way in so many places without having been challenged to any great extend, thus the expected and usual reaction of probing with means available, like weapons and threatening types of offensive type actions, in order to get some type of measurable reaction and more certainty. Things haven't changed that much....esp. when you have very large plans which could possibly now hit a few speed bumps that were never there under the delicate Obama "flexibility" for Mr. Putin!

Russia Compiles Psychological Dossier on Trump for Putin

MOSCOW — A dossier on Donald Trump's psychological makeup is being prepared for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Among its preliminary conclusions is that the new American leader is a risk-taker who can be naïve, according to a senior Kremlin adviser.

Trump "doesn't understand fully who is Mr. Putin — he is a tough guy," former Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Fedorov told NBC News.

The file is being compiled by retired diplomats and some of Putin's staff, he added.

The attempt to get inside the U.S. president's mind is aimed at helping Putin plan for his first meeting with America's new leader, the date for which is yet to be decided.

"Very serious preparatory work is going on in the Kremlin, including a paper — seven pages — describing a psychological portrait of Trump, especially based on this last two to three months, and the last weeks," added Fedorov, who said he has known Trump since 2000.

The dossier was being revised regularly, he said, adding that many in the Kremlin believed that Trump viewed the presidency as a business.

Fedorov added: "Trump is not living in a box — he is living in a crowd. He should listen to the people around him especially in the areas where he is weak."

It is normal for any president or leader to be fully briefed before entering negotiations for the first time with a rival leader, but preparing a detailed dossier on the mind and instincts of a U.S. leader is unusual.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...sier-on-trump-for-putin/ar-AAn9TBD?li=BBnb7Kz

 

Putin is not a dictator. More Fake News.

The real dictators are Obama, Nuland, McCain, Graham, Soros, the Neocons, and the neo-Nazi Junta currently occupying Kiev.

 

Dictators have been unfairly given a bad name. Whereas democracy seems almost universally to lead to a deterioration of national circumstance, one sometimes may be lucky to have a good dictator. The decline due to democracy is usually slow enough in liberal democracies to render the phenomenon imperceptible for most people. This decline is easier to detect in less traditionally liberal societies. Paradoxically, if given the choice, I suspect many Iraqis would opt for the choice-eliminating one of returning to the more stable rule of Saddam Hussein. Of course, there are more attractive options than Saddam. Many of the better dictators seem to be generals-Sisi in Egypt seems a fine example.

Donald Trump is a rare exception to the rule, one of a kind that tends to prove it. For once, sufficient people who were not fools, dupes immature or debauched managed to coalesce to elect a counter-cultural president. One hopes it can last.

As for Putin, given the amount of vicious propaganda directed at him and his country for the temerity of not being in step with the liberal, globalist world order, he would be a fool for not defensively getting to know the leader of his potential enemy, particularly in light of the mixed signals recently coming from the White House.

Again, Pat Buchanan has a lucid article on the subject, free to read on Takimag.

 

I could see them wanting to do this on Trump, it goes along with what Edward Snowden said in an interview which someone posted. I believe the Snowden basically stated that Russia preferred Trump to Clinton only because they knew what they would be getting with her.

 

Just a little offering link from Spirit Daily....for one's curiosity if nothing else (seems like oligarchical traits may be in the drinking water there):

How the Russian Orthodox Church is backing Vladimir Putin's new world order

(a portion of article)

........
According to material from Soviet archives, Kirill was also a KGB agent; as Patriarch he dedicated a church to the KGB.

While his political closeness to the regime has been criticised, he has also been tarnished by the ROC's financial dealings. After the fall of the Soviet Union the Church received special privileges, including the right to import alcohol and tobacco free of duty. It made massive amounts of money as a result through a string of companies with interests in areas ranging from TV to oil. Profits from the cigarettes operation alone – which ended in 1997 – were estimated at $4 billion by The Moscow News in 2006. Kirill has always denied profiting personally from the operations, though his credibility was undermined when he was seen wearing a Breguet watch worth $30,000 in 2012 – and further undermined when spin doctors made a clumsy attempt to airbrush the watch out in a picture on the ROC website.

Why the Church doesn't criticise the Kremlin

Speaking at the same conference, Bourdeaux referred back to the establishment of the Moscow Patriarchate by Stalin during the Second World War after its abolition by Lenin. Part of the deal, he said, was that it would never criticise the Kremlin. Keston understood the pressure the Church was under and did not criticise it – though, he said, they were "stunned" to discover, in the early '90s, the extent of collaboration between the Church leadership and the atheist state.

When Communism collapsed, he said, "the Church leadership saw its opportunity to re-establish itself as a leading player in the new Russian state".

He concluded: "Now free from Soviet constraints, church leaders might have been expected to write dispassionately about the troubled history of the Soviet period. But this is far from happening. There's been no act of repentance for the collaboration with the Soviet regime. Those who fought for religious liberty during the later Soviet period have been largely edited out of history, even though many lost their freedom – and some their lives – in the cause of freedom."

And, says Bourdeaux: "These attitudes explain why the Moscow Patriarchate hasn't been willing to use its voice to attempt to rein in the forces leading to the Kremlin's aggression in Ukraine and the Crimea. My prayer is that, one day – and one hopes sooner rather than later – the Russian Orthodox Church would discover a prophetic voice and use its immense in influence in an attempt to reach a just resolution of the conflict in Ukraine."

http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...ing.vladimir.putins.new.world.order/81108.htm

 

It's not a Russian 'New World Order'. Putin's actions are in what has traditionally been regarded as the legitimate zone of influence of a large power. In contrast, the United States, particularly for the last quarter century, but also before, has exerted huge influence directly and indirectly upon states and nations far beyond its local sphere of influence, usually because of a desire for cheap and plentiful oil. The Ukraine was quite stable and peaceful until the Obama administration decided to instigate a coup there. The Russian Church could be more outspoken but it is little different, in its complicity with its establishment, than an official Catholic Church which seems to be siding with the globalist, Erlechian 'climate change' and no-borders agenda.

 

Except that those in the firing range territories don't exactly seem to enjoy your "Russia only brings peace wherever she ventures" nor the endearing, only to those in control, foundational premise that she has the RIGHT to such behavior....because, well, God has ordained such. Save it for those no longer open to such risk due to previous experience and take a look as well at their side of the argument, well founded. And it would appear that any "official Catholic Church" these days seems to be open to (or co-opted by) all types of various and sundry proselytizers, and now for decades, within any and all formerly "conquered" mission territories of the past. Don't expect the Russian Church to permit even Franklin Graham to move openly.....after such propagandized set up little "ecumenical" sharings of a day or two. Vat II was forced to agree to the Church not publicly criticizing the Soviets/Commie stuff there in order to even get the Orthodox to list itself as attending....and that agreement was in force until the wall came down....which many think influenced why Russia by name could never be mentioned in Consecration as requested by our Lady. Obama has assisted quite well, and only up to that previously agreed upon point, in serving up the necessary excuses without any real big stick follow up for Mr. Putin to proceed in his now recognized big plans of off shore ventures....including entry to many Middle East countries beyond Syria. But shhh, don't say anything.....I never told you!

 

Firstly, where have I stated that 'Russia only brings peace wherever she ventures', or even implied that this is an attribute of any great power?

I also wish to take issue with your assertion that my statement that Russia's actions might be 'legitimate' in the context of humanly conceived and generally agreed international law is equivalent to a 'right' of some kind.

We in Ireland can bear testimony that empires do their imperialist thing and all the more so in their immediate bailiwicks. It has always been so and always will as it is an essential manifestation of human nature demonstrated by the larger collective. There is no precedent in the history of human nature or of empire of a political entity self-appointing itself as the superior of others in order to 'police' them and make them behave in what their self-regarding moral superiority regards as a better way. The American Empire is no different than any other in History, simply looking after her own interests and rationalising this as bringing democracy and justice to the rest of the world. It is hubris and folly and it is the people of the Middle East and Europe who are tasting the bitter fruit.

Many of the American elites pursue war in the security that their country has been able to conduct such war in faraway places, with most of the misery inflicted upon peoples far away. They seem to possess a feeling of impregnability. However, I have been intrigued for a good while that the officially-approved Church prophesies possess virtually no references to US involvement in European affairs regarding future chastisements, although Russia is mentioned. Be careful what you wish for. WWIII didn't happen during the last Cold War. Things are more unstable and unbalanced now. Nobody knows how a Third World War would turn out.

 

I'll take Putin's Christian World Order over the Freemason World Order any day of the week.

Trump is really a last chance for the West to correct the decades of unjust warmongering. Either the West repents of the decades of unjust wars or we continue the Neocon agenda and face the Chastisement prophesied at Fatima. Trump is only one man. It will take many more men of power within the Military and Deep State to stand up in the interests of peace for Trump to succeed.

 

I wouldn't be entirely sanguine about Putin. I do think America should retain a strong military, but, as Theodore Roosevelt understood, this big stick should be accompanied by a policy of speaking softly rather than the fomentation of bellicose provocations that occurred under Obama. The two nations need to come to an understanding of their roles and influence within the world. I am confident that there are enough wise heads in the US military, despite Obama's attempted emasculation, to see the sense in this.

 

Well, my comments have been in the context and foundation of the article offered for comment or not....so don't take everything personally. But if you can sit watching Russia's aggressive movements with excuses then it is logical to assume that you equate a current peace in such liberated countries from the Soviet control with what Putin plans on offering them, ergo something similar to that peace, then one does wonder. It was the article that used the Russian church's excuse for cooperating with the state so often in history and due to that Church's discerning such Mother Russia's expansionist vision as a type of God's will for Mother Russia. And I never can see the argument for ignoring current frightening movements by a known America hater and the need to at least be watchful rather than some presupposed anointing of one not really all that convincing of any such conversion from old methods and ways....esp. based on ideology and/or free expression and rights....when the usual knee jerk argument continues to recognize only America's past aggression based on opposing Marxist or Fascist control spreading and thus a need, warranted or not as seen by hindsight, to defend afar the national interest of protecting a preferred system of freedom. IOW, better to stop such movements at a distance than on one's border. Now that point may not have been introduced in more recent re-education educational systems of the West. To think of the new "experiment" of America having an "empire" in the sense of a world history extending far into the past shows a rather needy exaggeration and ignorance.

I think we see just the opposite today having happened both in the U.S. and the EU.....a new philosophy of benevolence toward the known enemy....rather a suicidal approach.....which has encouraged Putin's aggressive moves. It's policies of specific historical figures.....like the Obama/Hillary type or Carter's foolishness that have been defended by those in the West who are now literally committing treason against their own people, subjecting them to an invasion and abuse of their women beyond imagination. And rather than what you speak of as America "pursuing war" for the sake of security there is not evidence of that currently or in the recent past....just the opposite; arming the dedicated enemy and opening our own doors to make it even more convenient for such chaos. WWIII began with the corrupt Iran nuke deal which is dedicated to destroy us, that Big Satan (and of course Israel); certainly not for our defense and security. So a U.S. defending itself or its allies wouldn't be considered within a prophecy stating Russian aggression and as THE instigator. Thank God for His answer to this insanity with Mr. Trump as was demonstrated by His similar benevolent answer to prayers in past history. We'll see.....if prayers and sacrifices continue by the remnant. And that's because America IS different and THE most Christian country in the present world and those of good will have continued to defend this special calling upon them. Europe gave up any Christian roots within their acknowledged history long ago. Shouldn't one wish for defense of the remnant good in those countries as well? If not then that WOULD be a case to beware for what you wish for due to pride, jealousy or whatever.

And when one finds any excuse for such current aggressive movements as if those who have suffered by same horror in history, like Ukraine, or Poland or the Baltic states, or even those who would be victims of further push into more central Europe, as if they should have no reason to beg for greater defense systems from those most logically expected to do so, that one looks pretty confused. That's not a future to be co-opted for. Every true leader, when fulfilling his first responsibility of security and defense of his country must recognize current real threats rather than whistling past a massive graveyard. We just haven't seen that for the past 8 years and so many, esp. the young, would rather close their eyes to such history if they are even knowledgable of that history. When they can't identify a picture of Reagan when asked or basic questions about their own country's history while praising Castro for only one example then unfortunately they'll have to experience a rude awakening. How soon everyone forgets that scariest of moments due to Russia's own reason to believe it could overrun the naive Mr. Kennedy. Another "moment" the world stood still. Now they're tossing around the nuke footballs everywhere like it's simply a rerun of the movie, "The Mouse That Roared"! And we should just wait and see. I don't think so!

 

I'm afraid, DeGaulle, that the wise heads in the military won't be the ones to decide. It's clear that there are strong influences in both US political parties that want war. Maybe not all-out war, but proxy wars that keep the money flowing into what people call the military industrial complex. Notice that the two US politicians in the clip posted earlier in the thread weren't promising that the US would fight Russia over Ukraine. They were promising that the US would keep the Ukrainians supplied with military hardware. That's McCain's stock in trade. He (and Soros) has been involved in mixing it up from the start. Same old, same old.

They're at the same racket in Europe, demonising anyone who would prefer peace with Russia over war or hostilities. They always have to have an enemy or bogeyman for people to fear. They will invent one if necessary. Notice how careful they are not to step on China's toes.

 

We will have to agree to differ on the politics, as our views of both politics and history are incompatible. However, I am sure we agree about basic grammar and when you wrote, in reply to me, of "your 'Russia only brings peace wherever she ventures' ", how can I not take the comment personally-it is you, yourself, who made it so?

I find it baffling that your praise of Kennedy leaves you blind to the planting of missiles on Russia's borders and that you can forget the Bay of Pigs, but accuse Putin of aggression for annexing the Crimea, an event that repeated opinion polls show is supported by a large majority of even the Ukrainians of Crimea.

 

I think that the military-industrial complex can be brought on side with a few orders for F-35's and the like. This not only creates much employment, it is far more profitable than selling SAM's and machine-guns to guerillas. Combined with the prospect of no more unwinnable wars against cloth-heads, I think the military would be happy to come on board. The scenario is far from perfect, but may be the best achievable.

Additionally, Trump's stance on the global-warming scam should see huge areas opened up for oil drilling and fracking. America has the potential to be fully oil-independent which would negate the need for foreign oil wars and have the nice secondary effect of bankrupting the vile Saudi regime.

 

I hope you're right, DeGaulle, but fear there are bigger problems down the road. Even if Trump does manage to put a stop to McCain's gallop, the elephant in the room is that within a few decades something like one in three people on the planet will be Muslim. Islam at its core is far from peace loving. Add to that the tech billionnaires promoting an anti-Christian agendas and we have a recipe for disaster. Looking at Trump (and I'm not his biggest fan), I sometimes get the feeling that he's like the boy in Holland trying to keep out the sea by sticking his arm in the hole in the dike.

 

We don't know how it will play out between Trump and McCain. We shouldn't lose any sleep over the population ratios of a few decades time. Apart from the change possible from even one nuclear war (or other chastisement), I do wonder at the accuracy of these projections. Given the chaos evident in their societies, how accurate are population estimates from the Third World? How truthful are they in Islamic societies prone to taqiyya? Is there an agenda of providing globalism with the data it desires (and the global-warning scam clearly demonstrates the willingness of scientists to alter data)?