…by Jonas E. Alexis
Some people have accused Vladimir Putin of playing in the hands of the powers that be by rubbing shoulders with pernicious people like Benjamin Netanyahu, a man who has been perpetuating lies from time immemorial.
“The best estimates at this time place Iran between three and five years away from possessing the prerequisites required for the independent production of nuclear weapons.
“After this time, the Iranian Islamic republic will have the ability to construct atomic weapons without the importation of materials or technology from abroad…The first phase of construction and electrical work will be completed within three to four years.”
Fighting Terrorism was hailed as a breakthrough by the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Detroit News, etc. Yet seventeen years later, the New York Times itself documented that based on U.S. intelligence findings, Iran was not interested in building a bomb.
And even if Iran wanted a bomb, 28-year veteran of the C.I.A. and academic Paul R. Pillar argues that based on the standards that the West is imposing on Iran, “we can live with a nuclear Iran.” Jewish scholar Avner Cohen has said pretty much the same thing.
So, when people see Putin shaking Netanyahu’s hand and trying to reach out to him, they seem to be thinking that Putin himself is part of the New World Order. Those people seem to ask, how is it that Putin hasn’t really exposed the mad man from Tel Aviv for what he truly is?
This is certainly a legitimate concern and it merits some answers. Let us understand that it is unrealistic for Putin to fight every single ideological battle across the political firmament. That is too much for one man and for one country.
One step at a time is much more plausible and strategic than opening ten unwinnable conflicts, particularly when you may not have enough political and strategic resources from other Western countries to fight those conflicts, and particularly when you have the entire world watching over every step you make.
Putin certainly knows the history of Russia and that Jewish revolutionaries played a central role in the Bolshevik Revolution. Putin personally knew Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the man who meticulously documented that millions upon millions of precious Christians and other political dissents died at the hands of Bolshevik leaders.
In fact, Solzhenitsyn praised Putin. In fact, Putin has specifically made Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago “as required reading for Russian high school seniors about the crimes of the Soviet regime.”
Putin “has granted a top state award to Alexander Solzhenitsyn to honor the Nobel Prize winning writer as a champion of humanitarian causes…” “Putin inherited a ransacked and bewildered country, with a poor and demoralized people,” said Solzhenitsyn of Vladimir Putin,
“And he started to do what was possible, a slow and gradual restoration. These efforts were not noticed, nor appreciated, immediately. In any case, one is hard-pressed to find examples in history when steps by one country to restore its strength were met favorably by other governments.”
“We are proud that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was our compatriot and contemporary. We will remember him as a strong, courageous person with a great sense of dignity. His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland and the ideals of freedom, justice and humaneness.”
So, it is really unpersuasive to say that Putin is part of the New World Order. He obviously knows that it is suicide to hastily produce a full frontal and political attack on Israel at this present moment. As we shall see, he did something far more strategic than expected.
In all probability, Putin is trying to give the mad man in Tel Aviv some carrots and presents sticks later. In fact, historical evidence shows us that Russia has “lowered its political profile in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, much to Tel Aviv’s satisfaction.”
We know that Israel and the Zionist state of America are two sides of the same coin. And we know that Putin has strategically attacked the Zionist State of America and NATO. He has even made it clear that the U.S. and NATO are a threat to Russia.
Why? Is it because Putin is always looking for trouble? Is it because he wants to rebuild the former Soviet Union, as New World Order agents have perversely and incoherently declared? Or is it because no serious politician and thinker can stand the bloodbath that the U.S. and its allies are perpetuating in the Middle East and elsewhere? Is it because the New World Order continues to play double standards?
For example, Saudi Arabia continues to behead people in broad daylight and without due process, and all they have to do to chop people’s heads off is say that those people have done something wrong. But when any other Middle East country even remotely uses the same tactic, the U.S. calls it barbaric. There is again an explicit contradiction here. Even Newsweek itself did not hesitate to declare in 2014:
“The escalation of the war against the Islamic State was triggered by widespread revulsion at the gruesome beheading of two American journalists, relayed on YouTube. Since then, two British aid workers have met a similar grisly fate. And another American has been named as next in line by his terrorist captors.
“Yet, for all the outrage these executions have engendered the world over, decapitations are routine in Saudi Arabia, America’s closest Arab ally, for crimes including political dissent—and the international press hardly seems to notice. In fact, since January, 59 people have had their heads lopped off in the kingdom, where “punishment by the sword” has been practiced for centuries.”
So, the U.S. and their allies continue to violate international law and continue to use double standards. Moreover, the Zionist media continues to take those double standards and spread them across America and much of the world, leaving the untrained mind in a hopeless quandary.
Listen for example to a mush-head at Forbes. In response to Donald Trump’s view that no one has produced serious evidence showing that Putin has killed journalists and political dissents, Paul Roderick Gregory declared:
“Only the naïve would know there will be no such proof when the Kremlin controls prosecution, justice and the secret police. Putin’s hybrid warfare and its plausible deniability complicates proof of crimes against the international order, despite obvious Russian military engagement in Georgia and Ukraine.
“First, Trump must know that Putin ordered the hybrid war against Ukraine that has, according to conservative United Nations estimates, killed more than 9,000 and wounded nearly 21,000. Combatants and civilians are being killed daily despite a so-called truce brokered by Russia. More than one and a half million people have been displaced and almost four million are living under desperate circumstances.”
First of all, I fail to see the point that “Putin’s hybrid warfare and its plausible deniability complicates proof of crimes against the international order” is itself proof that Putin has killed journalists and political dissents. But let us suppose that this nonsense were true. Let us suppose that Gregory is right in all his statements. Here is a question for him.
How does he explain the fact that “Final results of the referendum in Crimea show that 97 percent of voters have supported leaving Ukraine to join Russia”? Can Gregory name one American presidential candidate who has even reached that figure in recent memory?
This is a slam dunk and a hard punch in the face of New World Order agents! And are all those people dumb? They knew that Putin was committing crimes by the thousands, and they still voted for him? Gregory certainly does not make sense at all.
Moreover, if Putin is the aggressor here, how is it that Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya were completely wiped out in Gregory’s analysis? How did this man manage to publish his nonsense without any remorse or moral clarity? Who is he kidding? Does he really think that there are no serious thinkers in the world who can actually detect his perversion?
Gregory cannot make sense because his oppressors tell him what to think. In fact, Lord Rothschild declared last March that “Russian aggression and expansion” were two of the most dangerous events in recent memory.
Gregory certainly needs to pick up a copy of Hegel’s Lectures on History and realize that double standards always come back to hunt their creators. Why?
Because double standards are not based on reason. And reason, as Hegel points out, will eventually triumph, despite the fact that pernicious men will seek to thwart its appearance. A classic example would be the events leading up to the NSA crisis. Republicans and Israeli puppets were on the front line defending the covert program. They all suspended the Constitution to maintain this diabolical operation.
But the chicken once again had suddenly come home to roost. It was discovered that the Obama administration spied on Israel. Israeli puppets and Jewish Neocons were on the front line saying that this was an unpardonable sin. Jewish Neocon Jonathan S. Tobin of Commentary declared then that “Obama crosses the line on spying.”
Commentary has produced hundreds of articles over the past few years denouncing Snowden as a traitor to America and declaring that spying on virtually every single American is a moral right. But when the same program spies on Israel, all of a sudden those same Jewish Neocons lose their minds.
Tobin flip-flops like a literal buffoon who hasn’t quite realized that his previous articles have been recorded. For example, when Snowden declared that the NSA was spying on virtually everyone, Tobin unequivocally said:
“No one should doubt that the U.S. spies on its friends and that, in turn, its allies spy on America. Thus, the latest round of Snowden leaks published in the Guardian, Der Spiegel, and the New York Times on Friday giving further details about such spying should surprise and outrage no one.”
So, why is Tobin upset now? Why can’t he accept the fact that the United States has been snooping on Israel, particularly when it comes to national security? Didn’t he say that “the U.S. spies on its friends”?
In the same vein, Jewish Neocon Max Boot of the same magazine declared when Snowden caught them by surprise that “metadata collection must be continued.”
GOP presidential candidate Marco Rubio, one of the flaming puppets of the Israeli regime, declared that “America needs a real commander in chief and a president that will keep us safe” because Obama “spies on Israel.” In an article entitled, “Is Marco Rubio a Sleeper Agent for Netanyahu?,” even Mother Jones, of all places, had to document the perversity of Israeli puppets like Rubio in one bombshell:
“Israel’s espionage activities in America are unrivaled and unseemly…going far beyond activities by other close allies, such as Germany, France, the U.K. and Japan. A congressional staffer familiar with a briefing last January called the testimony ‘very sobering…alarming…even terrifying.’ Another staffer called it ‘damaging.’ No other country close to the United States continues to cross the line on espionage like the Israelis do.”
Did Rubio think about any of these issues? No. He only knows what to think, not how to think, because he has been programmed by the Zionist machine to portray the Israeli regime in a positive light. In that sense, he is an agent of the New World Order.
Another question is this: how did other Zionist media respond to Putin’s slam dunk in Crimea? Listen to the Financial Times: “Crimea vote is no slam dunk for Putin.” What did Obama do then? Order more sanctions.
So, it wasn’t about “democracy” and “freedom” after all. It was about following a diabolical ideology, which always uses words like “democracy” and “freedom” in a perverse way. So, John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago was right after all, that “the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault.”
So, is Putin right in saying that the United States is a threat to Russia? The answer is yes. The United States has been running a diabolical course for far too long. And by calling the United States a threat, Putin seems to agree with the Ayatollah Khomeini when he used the term probably in 1979. He said then:
“the Great Satan has summoned its agents and instructed them to sow dissension among the Muslims by every imaginable means, giving rise to hostility and dispute among brothers in faith who share the belief in tauhid [unity], so that nothing will stand in the way of complete domination and plunder…
“There is no crime America will not commit in order to maintain its political, economic, cultural, and military domination of those parts of the world where it predominates.
“It exploits the oppressed people of the world by means of the large-scale propaganda campaigns that are coordinated for it by international Zionism. By means of its hidden and treacherous agents, it sucks the blood of the defenseless people as if it alone, together with its satellites, had the right to live in this world.”
Michael Jones writes that “Khomeini was here referring to Iraq, which had already launched a full-scale attack on Iran, as the proxy of America and Israel.”
But Khomeini’s insight is very easy to demonstrate in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pick up a copy of John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt’s The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, and you will see that the speech that was delivered in 1979 is still relevant today.
The United States is “The Great Satan” because it has abandoned the light of reason in the political and moral firmament and has embraced the Neoconservative ideology, which is essentially Talmudic, which is diabolical, and which is contrary to all mankind.
St. Paul would have concurred here. The spiritual descendent of the Neoconservatives, he would say, “both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men” (1 Thessalonians 2:15).
Unless those people drop their subversive movement and embrace Logos in all its manifestation, most specifically in the moral and political realm, they are still going to be contrary to all men.
Again, was Putin right in saying that the United States is a threat to Russia? Ideologically, yes.
 “Netanyahu, Putin and their so-called ‘chemistry,’” Jerusalem Post, November 21, 2013.
 See for example Scott Peterson, “Imminent Iran Nuclear Threat? A Timeline of Warnings Since 1979,” Christian Science Monitor, November 8, 2011; John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York; Farrar & Straus, 2007).
 Benjamin Netanyahu, Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1995), 121, 122.
 James Risen and Mark Mazzetti, “U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb, NY Times, February 24, 2012.
 Paul Pillar, “We Can Live with a Nuclear Iran,” Washington Monthly, March/April 2012.
 Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999); The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010).
 For those who are new to this topic, see Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), chapter 3; Jerry Z. Muller, Capitalism and the Jews (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010), chapter 3; Erich Haberer, Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Albert S. Lindemann, Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
 E. Michael Jones has a long chapter on this in his book The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008).
 Luke Harding, “WikiLeaks cables: Solzhenitsyn praise for Vladimir Putin,” Guardian, December 2, 2010.
 Richard Boudreaux, “’Gulag Archipelago’ Re-Issued for Russian Students,” Wall Street Journal, October 28, 2010; see also “Russian Revelations: Putting Putin In Perspective,” International Business Times, March 13, 2014.
 “Russian writer Solzhenitsyn awarded state humanitarian prize,” Sputnik News, May 6, 2007.
 Quoted in Peter Finn, “Toward end, Solzhenitsyn embraced Putin’s Russia,” Boston Globe, August 5, 2008.
 Trita Parsi, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the U.S. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2007), 147.
 Precious Silva, “Russia declares the United States and NATO as threats to its national security,” International Business Times, January 3, 2016.
 David Harding, “Beheadings in Saudi Arabia, at least 19 die,” NY Daily News, August 23, 2014; Angus McDowall, “Saudi Arabia steps up beheadings; some see political message,” Reuters, October 20, 2014; “Leaked video gives glimpse into Saudi beheadings,” CNN, January 21, 2015.
 Janine di Giovanni, “When It Comes to Beheadings, ISIS Has Nothing Over Saudi Arabia,” Newsweek, October 14, 2014.
 Paul Roderick Gregory, “Seven Warnings To Donald Trump About Vladimir Putin,” Forbes, January 8, 2016.
 “97 percent back Russia in final Crimea vote count,” NY Post, March 17, 2014; see also “Crimea referendum: Voters ‘back Russia union,’” BBC, March 16, 2014; “Crimea Referendum Vote On Joining Russia Scheduled For March 16,” Huffington Post, March 6, 2014.
 “Geopolitics most dangerous since WWII, Lord Rothschild warns investors,” Russia Today, March 5, 2015.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Obama Crosses a Line on Spying,” Commentary, December 30, 2015.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Spying on Americans, Then and Now,” Commentary, January 7, 2014.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Snowden, Spying, and Pollard,” Commentary, December 22, 2013.
 Max Boot, “Metadata Collection Must Be Continued,” Commentary, May 7, 2015.
 David Corn, “Is Marco Rubio a Sleeper Agent for Netanyahu?,” Mother Jones, January 8, 2016.
 John Thornhill, “Crimea vote is no slam dunk for Putin,” Financial Times, March 6, 2014.
 Alissa de Carbonnel and Luke Baker, “Crimea votes to join Russia, Obama orders sanctions,” Reuters, March 6, 2014.
 John J. Mearsheimer, “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusion That Provoked Putin,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2014 Issue.
 Quoted in E. Michael Jones, “The Great Satan and Me: Reflections on Iran and Postmodernism’s Faustian Pact,” Culture Wars, July/August 2015.
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.