Between Putin, Assad, Obama, and the Pussy Riot

DISCLOSURE: VT condemns the horrific tragedy committed by the NAZI Party against Jewish Citizens of Europe during Word War II known as the "Holocaust". VT condemns all racism, bigotry, hate speech, and violence. However, we are an open source uncensored journal and support the right of independent writers and commentors to express their voices; even if those voices are not mainstream as long as they do NOT openly call for violence. Please report any violations of comment policy to us immediately. Strong reader discretion is advised.

---

 

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Vladimir Putin, the one leader who has been hated by the Zionist regime, declared that “The Russian Orthodox Church has been with its people throughout its whole history. It has shared in people’s troubles and joys, has supported and inspired us, cemented the moral foundation of our society and national statehood….
“We shouldn’t forget that it was by undermining the spiritual and national values and through persecution of the Russian Orthodox Church and other traditional religions in Russia that we begin losing the unity in our state in our country and slipped into revolutions, fratricidal bloodshed, conflicts and war. 
“We hope to continue our versatile and positive partnership with the Russian Orthodox Church. We shall do everything we can to help it grow strong. We shall continue our cooperation and joint work in strengthening harmony in our society, with high moral values.
“National unity and peace between religions are beyond any doubt values of paramount historical importance in Russia…”[1]
Putin has made it clear that he is not against any form of religion. Putin has also made it clear that people of all background are free to worship, so long that they do not subvert the moral and political order.
“Putin regularly attends the most important services of the Russian Orthodox Church on the main Orthodox Christian holidays. He established a good relationship with Patriarchs of the Russian Church, the late Alexy II of Moscow and the current Kirill of Moscow.
“As President, he took an active personal part in promoting the Act of Canonical Communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, , signed 17 May 2007 that restored relations between the Moscow-based Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia after the 80-year schism.”[2]
Moreover, Putin is not against homosexuals, as has been relentlessly portrayed by the Zionist zealots in America. Both Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church believe that the government should interfere with people’s private lives and freedom. Moreover, they believe that homosexuality is sacred and a personal choice and should not be discriminated against.
But at the same time the Russian government believes that the LGB community cannot impose their worldview on an entire nation. But how does Obama respond to Putin’s mild stand against the Zionist regime? Here’s what Obama told Putin at the end of the G20 summit:

“Everyone here thinks you’re a jackass. Look, I’m not just talking about Snowden and Syria. What about Pussy Riot? What about your anti-gay laws? Total jackass moves, my friend. If you think I’m the only one who feels this way, you’re kidding yourself. Ask Angela Merkel. Ask David Cameron. Ask the Turkish guy. Every last one of them thinks you’re a dick.”[3]

Putin, in response, declared, “I should be afraid of this skinny man? I wrestle bears.”[4] Way to go, Putin!

On a serious note, how did Putin become a “jackass” and “a dick”?
Well, if you do not subscribe to the Zionist invasion of Syria (as the vast majority of Americans and many other countries around the world do not[5]), if you have not become completely “Jewified” in the theological and metaphysical sense, if you have not been baptized as a “born-again neocon,” then you are a jackass.
The Obama administration must have been surprised to have learned that less than ten percent of House supports Obama’s plan to strike Syria.[6]  The vast majority of them, according to Obama’s cogent logic, are jackasses.
But Putin largely has been trying very hard to come up with a mutual agreement between the Assad government and the Zionist regime in the United States so that a bloody war would not ensue.[7]  A bloody war will not be good for any Western country precisely because it will literally kill the economic and moral progress.
Moreover, Putin must have seen that supporting the Syrian rebels/terrorists is already a wicked activity. For example, last January, USA Today declared that
“Saudi Arabia has sent death-row inmates from several nations to fight against the Syrian government in exchange for commuting their sentences…besides Saudis, the prisoners included Afghans, Egyptians, Iraqis, Jordanians, Kuwaitis, Pakistanis, Palestinians, Somalis, Sudanese, Syrians and Yemenis. All faced “execution by sword” for murder, rape or drug smuggling.”[8]
That act, of course, is pregnant with meaning. It most certainly means that scumbags from all over the Middle East are liberators in Syria! The Zionist regime amassed all those scumbags in order to destroy Syria and its people. The only country that objected to this Zionist hell was once again Russia.[9]

Putin, the Zionist regime, and the Pussy Riot

In a nutshell, Putin was right. A bloody war with Syria is simply not an option precisely because the Zionist oligarchs cook up too many lies in order for the Western world to trust them.
For Bill Keller of the New York Time, if you are an isolationist and reject perpetual wars in the Middle East, you are a pessimist.[10] What Keller implicitly ends up saying is that you ought to be optimistic, even if Keller and other Zionist left us with a 6-trillion dollar bill.
Economic advisor Larry Lindsey was fired by the Bush administration for suggesting that the war in Iraq would cost up to $200 billion. Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Mitch Daniels all said that the war would be about $60 billion. But the war would cost between four to six trillion dollars.[11]
Cheney and Rumsfeld propounded the nonsense that the Iraq war would be quick and cheap. But they could not come with even one war in American history that was quick and cheap. The 1991 Gulf War for example, which lasted for about six weeks, still has a heavy burden on Americans every year. It still costs four billion dollars every year.
By refusing to support a bloody war with Syria, Putin was obviously in war with the Zionist regime as well. Time magazine declares that Putin “dismisses evidence of chemical attack,”[12] leaving the impression that the Zionist regime did present some evidence. At another time, the Time continues to say that Putin’s position “has brought him increasingly into conflict abroad—particularly with the West.”[13]
What the magazine did not tell its readers is that Putin has not been in conflict with the West but with the Zionist version of what the West represents. Simon Shuster of Time writes unapologetically that Putin’s election reminded him of the czarist era.[14]  Max Boot of Commentary insinuated the same thing.[15]
As we shall see later in the winter, the czarist government was well aware of Jewish subversive activity and sought to respond to those activities by removing Jewish revolutionaries from their political power.
In return, those revolutionaries killed the czar family, an event which ultimately turned into a bloody catastrophe. It is no coincidence that Time magazine hates the czarist era largely because Jewish revolutionaries did not get to rule that era.
Shuster tacitly declares that the Russian government tried to silence revolutionary voices such as the Pussy Riot. Shuster himself declares that the Pussy Riot
“walked into the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, the holiest site in Russian Orthodoxy, pulled colorful balaclavas over their heads and performed a ‘punk prayer’ on the altar that was titled ‘Mother of God, Chase Putin Away!’
“A few weeks earlier, they had danced with electric guitars on Red Square, atop the pedestal where the Czars once held public executions, and they posted a video online of a pudgy Kremlin guard trying to make them climb down from there. They were also planning to storm the Russian parliament and hold a performance on the podium during a plenary session.”
What did Shuster want the government to do when people walk into sacrilegious and private places and began to pull down sacrilegious symbols?
Shuster could not really make up his mind about whether the Pussy Riot deserved to be arrested. Boot implicitly wrote that the band did not deserve to be arrested at all.[16] Michael Volpe of FrontPage Magazine called members of the band “courageous.”[17]

Shuster sympathized with the band largely because their actions are congruent with Jewish revolutionary activity. The evidence for this is found in the ideology of the punk group itself. When asked the question “What does Pussy Riot hope to achieve?,” one of the articulate members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, then only twenty-three years old, responded,
“A revolution in Russia…  I want to destroy the things I consider the greatest evils. And I’m doing this by putting my ideas of freedom and feminism into practice…I love Russia, but I hate Putin.”[18]
As it turns out, Tolokonnikova’s hatred toward Putin stems from Putin’s strong support for the Orthodox Church. Tolokonnikova declares that the Russian Orthodox Church “ turns women into slaves, and Putin’s ideology of ‘sovereign democracy’ aspires in the same direction. Both reject everything Western, including feminism.”[19]
Tolokonnikova even called the church’s patriarchs “bitches.” This is very common among revolutionaries. Christopher Hitchens was no less sympathetic to Mother Teresa when he said, a “bitch.”[20]
But Tolokonnikova contradicted herself by saying that her video performance was “hardly the kind of thing to hurt religious feelings.”[21]
The million-dollar question is simply this: where did the Pussy Riot get their ideological foundation from? Simple: many members of the punk group are “anarchists, Trotskyists, and autonomists.”[22]
Yet according to Fred Weir of the Jewish World Review, “the women themselves insist they are baptized Christians…”[23] Weir could not give us a single evidence for this flimsy assertion.
But it gets even better. Jacob Laskin of FrontPage Magazine writes that the members were jailed simply because they were “protesting the government of Vladimir Putin”![24] He even moves further to say that the Putin administration is a “thugocrat.”[25] As journalist Rachel Marsden rightly declared:

“The protesters chose the shallowest form of subversion possible, their rationale apparently being that by doing a lewd can-can-girl number in a church, they can successfully overturn the government of a G8 country. That’s some serious stoner logic.”[26]

Putin and Assad

As it turns out, the Zionist regime hates Putin because he does not seem to mince words when he said that a war with Syria would be illegal.
Obama has denounced Putin precisely because Obama has already been “Jewified.” It has been reported that should the United States attack Syria—which would be illegal[27]—Israel should be notified.[28] In other words, Israel is in control here. And we know that the war is only good for Israeli regime.[29]
The Obama administration had a new trick under their sleeves earlier: they admitted that “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable doubt evidence” cannot be produced to prove that Assad used chemical weapons, but it is a “common-sense test”![30]
I simply do not know how people can summon nonsense like that and get away with it. And don’t forget that those people spent years in law school!
Imagine that someone accuses you of raping his wife. You go to court, and the judge asks the prosecutor to provide the evidence. The prosecutor rises from his seat and unapologetically declares, “It’s a common-sense test.”
When the judge further asks to show how people can get a hold of this alleged test, the prosecutor propounds ad infinatum that it is common-sense test is self-evidently true. How would you like that?
The administration is willing to go to war on a sovereign nation, but no serious evidence is to be provided. Surely the Obama administration knows that there is a rise of anti-war movement all across the United States,[31] England,[32] Canada, and other places.[33]
But the administration’s response to all this is that if those people do not accept the Zionist narrative that Assad has used chemical weapons, they therefore do not have common sense. Moreover, those people are probably “jackasses” and “dicks.”

As it turns out, these stupid arguments are only plausible in the minds of the Zionists and are not something that can be examined objectively. This became very clear after John Kerry himself saw the video of the Syrian rebels/terrorists systematically executing captured Syrian soldiers.
Kerry did not even consider the possibility that the rebels could be a hook in America’s throat.  Instead, he made the irresponsible point that if the U.S. does not invade Syria, rebel extremism would rise. He declared,
“I guarantee you if we turn our backs today, the picture we all saw in the paper today and the media of those people shot, that will take place more because more extremists will be attracted to this, because they will be funded as the only alternative in order to take on Assad.”[34]
Kerry reluctantly admitted that there are “jihadists who have been attracted to the chaos of Syria,” but those jihadists “are not part of the opposition that is being supported by our friends and ourselves. That is a moderate opposition. They condemn what has happened today.”[35]
Kerry should have read what Domenico Quirico has said. Quirico is an Italian journalist who was held hostage for five months by the rebels. He declared that he and others were treated
“like animals, locked in small rooms with windows closed despite the great heat, thrown on straw mattresses, giving us the scraps from their meals to eat. Even children and old people tried to hurt us. Maybe I am putting this in overly ethical terms but in Syria I really found a country of evil.”[36]
Those terrorists, continues Quirico, “take over territory, hold the population to ransom, kidnap people and fill their pockets.”[37]
Kerry should have also read what the New York Times recently said about the rebels and Assad. The Times declares that the rebels’
“ incursion into the [ancient Christian town of Maaloula], led by extremist Islamists, reinforces the worst fears of Syrian Christians and could bolster President Bashar al-Assad’s claims that he is the Christians’ protector.
“Some of the rebels, apparently aware of their public relations problem, said in interviews that they meant Christians no harm. They filmed themselves talking politely with nuns, instructing fighters not to harm civilians or churches and touring a monastery that appeared mostly intact.
“They said they had withdrawn from most of the town, posted videos of shelling there by Mr. Assad’s forces and argued that the government had given the fight a sectarian cast by sending Christian militiamen from Damascus to join in.
“But the damage was already done. Most of the town’s residents have fled, and Maaloula, one of the last places where Aramaic, the language of Jesus, is still spoken by Christians and some Muslims, has become a one-word argument against Western support for the rebels — at the worst possible time for Mr. Obama and the opponents of Mr. Assad.
“Syrian-Americans lobbying against the proposed American missile strike flooded Congressional message boards with appeals for Maaloula. A common refrain was that Mr. Obama was throwing Syria’s Christians ‘to the lions.’…
“Maaloula has long symbolized Syria’s history of diversity and coexistence… Even after a movement for political rights morphed into a civil war, local Sunni and Christian leaders worked to maintain calm.”[38]
While this madness is still going on, Jewish neoconservative Frederick W. Kagan tells us that “Bashar al-Assad has one of the largest chemical weapons in the world.”[39]
Who says that the Zionist regime is not a destroyer?

Putin is rational

So far, Putin has done a decent job standing in opposition to the Zionist regime. Poor Merkel is probably scared to death to side with Putin because she sees that Germany has already been carrying a Holocaust burden on the back of her shoulder. This Holocaust burden seems to be immemorial.
Putin has done some radical things. Russia actually gave Snowden asylum, and more recently it has been revealed that the NSA can actually snoop on you by tapping into your iPhones, Blackberry, and Android devices.
“The documents state that it is possible for the NSA to tap most sensitive data held on these smart phones, including contact lists, SMS traffic, notes and location information about where a user has been.”[40]
And even when the NSA is continuing to pursue illegal activities, they seem to have no match precisely because the Zionist machine has complete political power over us all at this present moment:
“The National Security Agency is winning its long-running secret war on encryption, using supercomputers, technical trickery, court orders and behind-the-scenes persuasion to undermine the major tools protecting the privacy of everyday communications in the Internet age, according to newly disclosed documents.”[41]

Putin and the Jews

Putin has also said some radical things in the past. For example, he unapologetically declared that the first Soviet government—and by this he is obviously talking about Bolshevism—was “80-85 percent Jewish.”[42] He continued to say that “those ideological goggles and faulty ideological perceptions collapsed.”[43]
Some would quickly jump to the conclusion that Putin is indeed an anti-Semite, but he moved on to implied that when those “ideological goggles” took over Russia, decent Jews who had nothing to do with the Bolshevik Revolution also suffered. Those Jewish revolutionaries
“supported the arrest and repression of Jews, Russian Orthodox Christians, Muslims and members of other faiths. They grouped everyone into the same category.”[44]
Whatever belief you may have about Putin, he surely has been on the front line implicitly defending the West against Zionist version of heaven on earth. He has certainly played a role in slowing down Obama’s aggressive and terrorist expansion in Syria. Obama does seem to be taking it easy over the past few days, and that drove the neoconservative war machine into a schizophrenic state.
Jonathan S. Tobin of Commentary declared that by abandoning his aggressive push on Syria, Obama has not only become incompetent and coward “but a lame duck until the end of his term of office.” Tobin continues,
“Since the signals of retreat on Syria coming from the White House today seem to put a period on even the most remote hope that the administration can find the will to act on Syria, it’s time for the second-guessing and recriminations about the president’s staggering incompetence to begin with a vengeance.”[45]
Thomas Sowell, who obviously is a protégé of the neoconservatives, writes that since Assad has ignored the “red line” ultimatum by using chemical weapons—an extraordinary statement for which Sowell has given not a single evidence[46]—Obama has put future American presidents on the line by not overthrowing Assad.[47]
Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard adds:
“War presidents don’t quibble. They don’t leak. They don’t go AWOL. They aren’t dispirited or downbeat. They aren’t ambivalent about the mission. And most important of all, war presidents are never irresolute…. So hesitation, delay, and unreliability are the hallmarks of Obama’s approach to Syria, for now…
“I’ve concluded Obama doesn’t want to be a war president. But in his desire to bomb Syria—an act of war— he’s become a war president. Now he needs to act like one. There’s still time.”[48]
No. Americans need to act like real Americans while there is still time: they should go back to what the Founding Fathers actually said about invading other countries. Once that is done, they will discover that the neoconservative machine and its Zionist headquarters in Israel[49] is one of the perennial enemies of America.
America has overwhelmingly done a great job by opposing a war with Syria. Polls taken from the Associated Press, ABC, CNN, Pew Research, USA Today, have all shown that Americans are of one voice: no war with Syria.[50] Americans need to take the next step: no more unconditional support for the terrorist state and the “problem child.”
George Monbiot of the Guardian has meticulously documented that “Obama’s rogue state tramples over every law it demands others uphold.”[51] True. But Monbiot would have done a much better job if he had actually told us the Zionist ideological forces that post beneath the rogue state. That ideological force has been a perennial enemy of the West since its inception.
This perennial enemy has developed chemical weapons since the 1960s[52] and has been on the frontline pushing other countries to give up their weapons.
Israel, to use Moshe Dayan’s own words, “must be like a mad dog,”[53] and Israel will never give up its terrorist and ethnic-cleansing activities until the West rises to the challenge. Where are the men of the West?

---