Guest Post: Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market blog,

Numerous cultures have had holidays dedicated to the celebration of pulling the wool over the eyes of others, from the ancient Romans, to early Muslims, to medieval Christians, to Americans and Europeans today. As April begins, we once again turn a mischievous eye to the concept of the fool and, as always, each person seeks to be the prankster and never the victim.

Unfortunately, even the most vigilant of Americans can sometimes be led astray by a clever ruse, and I believe this is taking place today in the Liberty Movement’s perception of the rising “tensions” between Russia and the West.

In my article Ukraine Crisis: Just Another Globalist-Engineered Powder Keg, I outlined the history of false paradigms and engineered conflicts between numerous nations, including how these conflicts are exploited by global money interests to consolidate and centralize social and political power. The birth of communist Russia, in particular, was directly funded by Western banks and supported with arms and military aid from the U.S. government itself. These sorts of startling facts are not taught in schools and universities exactly because the continued dominance of the money elite relies on continued misrepresentations of legitimate history.

Many in the Liberty Movement have studied and are well aware of the central banking cabal and its stranglehold on the U.S. and Europe. But strangely, some people refuse to acknowledge the substantial possibility that global bankers are also in control of Russia and are playing both sides of the burgeoning economic war.

As the Ukrainian crisis festers and other dangers in the Pacific and the Mideast grow, an odd consensus among alternative analysts is taking hold — namely the belief that President Vladimir Putin and Russia represent some kind of opposition to globalization and the rule of corporate financiers. Perhaps moments in Putin’s rhetoric and the existence of media outlets like RT have seduced elements of the Liberty Movement into assuming that Russia is a “victim” in the grand schemes of Western oligarchy and that Russia is truly the "white knight", the underdog willing to stand up against the New World Order. I’m sorry to say that nothing could be further from the truth.

Russia is just as much a tool of the global elite today as it was after the Bolshevik Revolution, and Vladimir Putin is just as much a socialist puppet as Barack Obama. Let’s start from the beginning of the rebirth of Russia as a regional federation in the 1990s after the fall of the Warsaw Pact.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the leader largely credited with the ultimate dismantling of the Soviet Union and the rise of the “new” Russia, has long been a proponent of the “New World Order” (his words) and centralized global government. In an address entitled “Perspectives On Global Change” to the students of Lafayette College in Easton, Penn., Gorbachev argued that such a solution was necessary to safeguard “freedom.”

 

“The opportunities that existed after the end of the Cold War… were not used properly. At that same time, we saw that the entire world situation did not develop positively. We saw deterioration where there should have been positive movement toward a new world order.”

He continued:

“But we still are facing the problem of building such a world order. We have crises: we are facing problems of the environment, of backwardness and poverty, of food shortages. All of these problems are because we do not have a system of global governance.”

When asked in 1995 by San Francisco Weekly what Gorbachev meant by the phrase “New World Order,” Jim Garrison, the executive director of the Gorbachev Foundation stated, bluntly that Gorbachev wanted nothing less than global government.

"Over the next 20 to 30 years, we are going to end up with world government. … It’s inevitable. It will happen and become just as normal to have a relationship with the rest of the world as we now have, say, if you are a Californian and you go to Vermont."

Take note that it has now been almost 20 years since the Garrison's assertion and the motions towards a global currency are picking up great speed.  Gorbachev saw global government being achieved through international organizations like the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But, is this vision of the New World Order limited only to Gorbachev and his inner circle? At the Gorbachev-led State of the World Forum in 1995, Council On Foreign Relations member Zbigniew Brzezinski had this to say:

“We do not have a New World Order. … We cannot leap into world government in one quick step. … In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.”

In Zbigniew K. Brzezinski’s book Between Two Ages: America’s Role In The Technetronic Era, he elaborates on the ideology behind what brand of government the New World Order would be:

"The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty… More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken."

"National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept… Marxism represents a further vital and creative state in the maturing of man’s universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief…"

Brzezinski seems to be in total agreement with Gorbachev, but why should anyone care what Brzezinski thinks about the future of American sovereignty? Perhaps it’s because he is a close and influential foreign policy adviser to Obama.

So we have now established that political interests on both sides since the 1990s have called for a New World Order and global government taking a decidedly socialist or Marxist form. Some people might applaud this kind of future, or they might despise it; but the fact remains that this plan is indeed being openly promoted and implemented by government officials and elitists in the East and the West. It is undeniable.

From its very inception, the new Russia was designed to become a catalyst for global governance, but global governance by whom? As they say, always follow the money.

Russia is more beholden to international bankers than perhaps any nation on the planet. After the collapse of the Russian economy and the dissolution of the old Soviet Union, the country was in dire straits. From 1992 to 1996, the IMF intervened in the Russian economy, offering more than $22 billion in aid (officially). This first loan package was presented as a failure when Russia defaulted on its debts, and loans from the IMF restarted through the late ’90s until this very day.

Many people are aware of the IMF involvement in Russia, but few know about the scandal surrounding where those IMF funds specifically went. In 1999, information was made public on the diversion of IMF cash into the coffers of Russian corporate elites, politicians, and even mobsters. This money was supposed to go toward the rebuilding of Russian infrastructure and economy. Instead, the aristocracy and criminal underworld were receiving a large cut of the funds.

The money was diverted and laundered through the Bank of New York, an institution founded in 1784 by none other than internationalist agent and central bank promoter Alexander Hamilton. The bank changed ownership through merger in 2007 and is now called The Bank Of New York Mellon.

The IMF’s first response to the scandal was to divert blame, stating that it had no control over the cash once it was in the hands of the Central Bank of Russia (CBR). After continued revelations on funds being misused or disappearing altogether, the IMF commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers to audit the CBR. The results of that audit have never been made public. However, in 1999 the Russian government admitted that it had hidden more than $50 billion offshore in a subsidiary bank in the Channel Islands. Part of this money came from IMF bailouts. The former chairman of the CBR, Sergey Dubinin, insisted that the IMF was fully aware of who the funds were going to.

Numerous officials from the chief state auditor to the minister of internal security to the prosecutor general of Russia had come forward with information that corroborated evidence that IMF money was being distributed to the wrong people. The chairman of the Duma Committee on Security stated that some of the IMF loans never made it to Russia. Rather, the money was pumped into the secret foreign accounts of Russia’s highest officials.

Despite all of the admissions and evidence, IMF auditors refused to cite any corruption or malfeasance during their investigations. One would think that they would do everything in their power to find out where their funds went and why. The reason for the cover-up is obvious: The IMF knew exactly who the money was going to. The first bailouts of Russia were designed to buy the cooperation of the Russian political and corporate elite and ensure that the future direction of the nation would follow the globalist plan.

Fast-forward to the present. Putin continues the subversive relationship between Russia and the IMF. In 2009, Putin called for the creation of a “super reserve currency” under the control of the IMF and using the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket as a foundation.

Why would Putin, a supposedly anti-globalist nationalist leader, want the IMF, a supposedly U.S.-controlled institution, to be the global purveyor and overlord of the world economy? It’s because the IMF is not a U.S.-controlled institution; it is a banker-controlled institution. And Putin is a globalist, not a nationalist.

The recent break of Crimea from Ukraine and secession to Russia was partly instigated by the vast concessions required by the IMF if loans to Ukraine were to move forward. One of these concessions included the handing over of Ukrainian gas pipelines to America’s Chevron. Crimean leaders accused Kiev politicians of selling out Ukraine to the global bankers.

However, it was actually Russia’s finance minister and Putin who first pushed for the IMF bailout of Ukraine. It was, in fact, Putin who wanted Ukraine to “sell out” to Western financiers.

Russia’s central bank is also a member of the Bank of International Settlements, the good-old-boys club of the international banking world. The BIS was founded in 1930 and served as the focal point of globalization until after World War II, when evidence arose that the organization had helped the Nazis by funding the German war machine, laundering money for Gestapo officials and hiding funds looted from Europe by the Third Reich.

Due to the scandal, the BIS took a back seat to the IMF and World Bank; but it still exists today. Carroll Quigley, Council on Foreign Relations member, elitist insider and mentor to Bill Clinton, had this to say about the BIS in his book Tragedy And Hope:

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

Putin has been elevated to heroic status in much of the mainstream media over the years. TIME magazine, a long-running globalist publication, recently published a front-page article with this tagline: “America’s weak and waffling. Russia’s rich and resurgent — and its leader doesn’t care what anybody thinks of him.”

This cover was used by TIME in every country in which it is distributed, except the United States.

The Times of Britain named Putin “Man Of The Year” in 2013. In Liberty Movement circles, Putin worship has been growing to disturbing levels. I would say at least half of our movement truly believes Putin and Russia to be a guiding light in the fight against globalization and the New World Order. Unfortunately, many people look for heroes to save them when they should be looking to themselves. Putin’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize for his “intervention” in the Syrian crisis is celebrated by many freedom fighters here in America, when, in reality, the Obama Administration’s failure to achieve a war footing in the region had nothing to do with the actions of Russia.

Remember, Russia and the U.S. are nothing but false champions dueling in a fake gladiator match paid for by the IMF. The war against Syria was thwarted because the elites were unable to garner enough public support from the American people to make the action viable. Every engineered war needs a gullible percentage of the population to give it momentum. Why didn’t they get their following from the public? It was because of the tireless efforts of the alternative media.

It was the Liberty Movement that exposed the lies behind the Syrian insurgency; the consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya; the CIA’s involvement with al-Qaida in Damascus, etc. It is the Liberty Movement that deserves the credit for disrupting the globalist plan to use Syria as a trigger event for a false confrontation between the U.S. and Russia. Yet many are cheering the elitist puppet Putin while he takes credit for our accomplishments.

The most frightening aspect of the false paradigm between East and West is the potential it creates for the co-option of liberty proponents here in America. If we allow ourselves to be suckered into cheerleading for Russia, or any controlled government for that matter, then we have lost. We will be swallowed up in the tides of war, while supporting false prophets and artificial protagonists. Our mission, the mission for a truly free and sovereign America, will be lost in the confusion and chaos of the global chess game. It is time to accept that the fate of this country and perhaps the future of human freedom rest solely on the shoulders of the resistance here at home. There is no nation out there in the ether of central banking that is going to help us. The sooner we come to terms with the reality that we are on our own, the stronger we will be when the fight begins.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
MeMongo's picture

All of this makes Mongo wonder "who" the true, original Bolsheviks really were?

El Oregonian's picture

Well then who's going to be Putin it into Barry if not Vlad?

icanhasbailout's picture

Verdict first, write article later.

BigJim's picture

Brandon??? What are you doing criticizing Putin on ZH??? Don't you know how much man-love there is here for this glorious embodiment of liberty?

Putin is our FRIEND! He will break the petrodollar and all our gold and silver will finally be worth a fortune! We'll be so rich we might even get laid!* 

Vlad hates the Ziobankers! He will deliver us because he CARES for the little guy! 

*assuming we can actually retrieve our phyzz after all those unfortunate boating accidents

Sashko89's picture

Gorbachev and the zionist/communist revolution of 1917 were financed by western bankers. Russias central bank was created to fullfill the interests of the west true. However, Putin is not in allegiance with western bankers, and no one in Russia has any respect forGorbachev. The man is seen as a traitor. And if u actually look at todays policies of putin and russias central bank you'll see they are not controlled by the west anymore. Russia still has a central bank because very few Russians have studied Austrian economics unforanetely. This article is deceiving.

sashko

Pure Evil's picture

Uh, Gorby wasn't around until 1935.

1917 was the playbook of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, with a few others of course.

And, when did Austrian economics have anything to do with central banking.

You must be thinking Keynesian-ism and central banks.

 

So, who's the Debbie Downticker on the webpage?

Sashko89's picture

"Pure Evil" you really are evil...

 

First of all i said they were both "financed" , I did not say existed in the same time... I think your smarth enough to understand that. Second Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky were all jews financed by other jews from the west. 

 

Thirdly austrian economis has a lot to do with central banking. It is the only school of economic thought that I know of that argues that we do not need to have a central bank in an economy! Idk if you have ever read an austrian economics publication? 

 

So to answer you question, "So, who's the Debbie Downticker on the webpage" ? You are my dear friend, you are i dicn't downtick anything but "Pure Evil".

 

Sashko

 

Pure Evil's picture

Thanks for the waste of time reading your drivel, now if I can only get back those 5 seconds of my life.

Stalin was not a Jew, Lenin was barely a jew, but yes, Trotsky was jewish. (of course these are not official sources)

As for the Austrian School of Economics:

"They are particularly critical of long-standing governmental incursions into the area of private money production, advocating instead the immediate abolition of all coercive legal tender laws and the return to full reserve - or free - banking, where the financial system is decentralized and not dominated or controlled by coercive monopoly government or a monopoly central bank"  

(Source http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Austrian_School)

I think that kinda means they don't believe in central banking as we currently know it, as in, the Federal Reserve.

And, your sentence structure implies that you are linking Gorbachev and the Zionist/communist revolution of 1917 as being in the same time reference. Sentence structure and grammer do matter to really get your point across.

As far as being really evil, well that's not exactly true. I'm really pure evil, there is a difference, lets try not to equivocate on that.

 

 

BellyBrain's picture

Good to see some common sense about Putin for a change.  This "east vs west" tension is being orchestrated, and we are all supposed to dance to their tune.  We need to tell them to shove their orchestra up their asses and quit fucking up the planet for everyone else.  Elitist assholes.

MeMongo's picture

Pure evil bastard, you say Stalin was not a who, hardy frickin har. The one and only great Gen. George S Patton wanted to go all the way to be sure to take out that squinty eyed......who.... The tribe you speak of can be easily "sourced" and by any real free thinker can be summarily disseminated! Good try though;-)

ATG's picture

History rhymes

A sick FDR, with USSR troops 40 miles from Berlin, an army three times the West, gave Eastern Europe, 200,000 Kresy Poles who fought for the Allies with Slavs and White Russian German Prisoners of War to Stalin in Yalta, part of Crimea, for unfulfilled promises Poland would have free elections under the Soviets, who "only wanted a buffer."

Churchill believed that, because of Stalin's strong promises and admission of guilt over Poland, that Stalin might keep his word regarding Poland, remarking "Poor Neville Chamberlain believed he could trust Hitler. He was wrong. But I don't think I'm wrong about Stalin

Whoops

14 Soviet Repuiblics were denied admission to the UN. Some of them are now NATO members

Citizens of the Soviet Union and of Yugoslavia were handed over to their respective countries, regardless of their consent

In the words of Admiral William D. Leahy, the language of Yalta was so vague that the Soviets would be able to "stretch it all the way from Yalta to Washington without ever technically breaking it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference

Rafferty's picture

Stalin was not Jewish and you weaken an otherwsise good case through such factual errors.  In any event the Bolsheviks were dominated by enough genuinely Jewish figures such as Lenin himself  (spoke Yiddish at home), Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Yorovsky and Sverdlov (who ordered the murder of the Czar's family).  Stalin himself had a Jewish wife and  the first Soviet commissariats were largely staffed with Jews.

ATG's picture

Stalin was not Jewish

Stalin was conscious of being Georgian and was in a sense both proud of it and ashamed of it at the same time. In this way he is comparable to jews like Trotsky; whom he is frequently compared with, as he was a member of a minority that felt itself persecuted by the Russians and was allied with the jews against the Russians.

http://bit.ly/1in3gwx

 

Againstthelie's picture

And Trotsky, on his way torwards Russia, had already been arrested in Canada, but thanks to some dubious intervention from New York was freed.

MeMongo's picture

Sorta like Pollard that traitorous prick!

Rafferty's picture

Who seems likley to be released soon, thanks to endless pressure from the Isreali Firsters.

Redneck Hippy's picture

Zionist /communist revolution!!  Wow, did those zionists fuck up then.  Russia has been a very bad place to be a Jew.

Againstthelie's picture

You mean the 90% comissars?

The liquidation of the Russian Christian middle class by Jewish Bolshevism?

Or Jew Lenins order against anti-Semitism?

Or the slaughering of the Christian Ukrainians by Jewish comissars?

The more than ten times overrepresentation in leading positions of Jews in the "worker's paradise"?

Or do you mean the autonomous Jewish Soviet Republic Birobidschan?

UrbanMiner's picture


This article is yet another sad attempt to gloss over reality and provide cherry picked factoids without relevant context.

Russia is represented as a participating member of the BIS and takes part in gatherings of the 55 members, considering Russia's economic size and global position, membership in the G20, the UN and the BIS are pretty much a foregone conclusion. What the author fails to mention is that the policy of the BIS is manufactured by the governing body which consists of 6 member states:

BIS’s executive body is the Board of Directors and has 19 members. The Board has six ex officio 

directors, comprising the Governors of the central banks of BelgiumFranceGermanyItaly, the UK 

and the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve System. The ex officio 

members may appoint another member from the same country to the Board. The Board can also 

include up to nine additional members elected from the remaining member countries. Meeting at least 

six times a year, the Board is responsible for setting the strategic direction and policies of the Bank as 

well as overseeing the Bank’s management. - http://www.oneworldtrust.org/publications/doc_view/82-2006-gar-accountab...

With regard to Russia's current IMF debt load, how much exactly would that be? Considering they paid off the balance early in 2005, 3 years before the due date for final payment - http://en.ria.ru/business/20050201/39701023.html

If Russia was such a greased member of the financial cabal, why in the world would Russian foreign policy seek to thwart the imposition of western rule over Syria and Iran? The end goal is the participation of every nation under universal rule, as dictated by the governing members of the BIS, and requires complete subjugation by every major political and energy power on earth. Yet still standing defiant due in large measure to Russian 'meddling' is IranSyria and Hezbollah. Why would the hidden power of Zion delay their own crowning as masters of all the world's economies? 

This verdict by association article implies that Gorbachev supported the holy grail of Zion, global governance, and that by default Putin was also a pawn of the conspiracy, but where are the connections between the two, other than vague references to Putin's KGB background? 

To gain a perspective as to the attitude of Russian leadership one cannot look much further than its renewed outward support of the Eastern Orthodox religion, in contradistinction with the agenda of scientific materialism espoused by the Elite of Zion. Is this a black and white issue? Far from it, but there are general trends and social currents that actually do make sense if viewed from the proper perspective.

Finally, Putin's comments on a centralized basket currency system was also taken out of context. The collapse of 2008 had just occurred, the global monetary system appeared broken, the effects of the U.S. economy via the petrodollar system echo effect during the meltdown created an atmosphere of alternative currency ideas, and reforming an already existing institution that already had an architecture and framework was much more preferable to starting from scratch. In this respect the IMF, the UN, and G20 can in fact be organs of justice, and the reality is that the world economies are all destined to be linked in some way, so stability is a desire of all parties, the question remains, will these institutions prove equitable in their decision making process, or will a small clique of members hold the trump cards at all times? In this process Russia is an outsider, their call for a more equitable basket arrangement is in fact a workable solution, considering the proposal included tangible commodities. A very convincing article, with little correlation to a much more subtle and nuanced reality.

runningman18's picture

"In this respect the IMF, the UN, and G20 can in fact be organs of justice, and the reality is that the world economies are all destined to be linked in some way, so stability is a desire of all parties"

 

This is where your theory falls apart.  The IMF has never been an "organ of justice".  Just look at how they fleece third world nations and throw money behind dictators.  They are the king loan shark of the banking world.  The fact that Putin continually throws his support behind them warrants considerable suspicion as to what his allegiances are.  Putin pushed for the IMF to take over economic management of Ukraine just weeks ago, so your assertion that his fealty to the global bankers is limited to 2008 is either misplaced or dishonest.  You are obviously paying too much attention to what Putin says and not enough attention to what Putin actually does.  Next you're going to claim that the Republicans and the Democrats are opposed to each other. 

UrbanMiner's picture

I'm talking about the organ itself, not the personnel, the IMF as an institution 'could' be used for positive development, I was clear about this occurring only if the reigns of power were dislodged out of the hands of a core group of insiders.I never once claimed that the IMF is an organ of justice, you seem to be a master of putting words in other peoples mouths. Did you even read what I wrote other than a cursory glance?

What Putin said regarding the Ukraine is akin to a husband and wife in turmoil, the wife is found cheating so the husband says something like, "Fine, go live with that asshole then, and tell him to pay your bills too". Russia had 15 billion lined up (3 billion already provided) before the unrest made it an untenable proposition. 12 billion of free money to the tentacles of Zion? You propose Russia foot the bill of the coup? 

 

 

runningman18's picture

You said the IMF "could be" an "organ of justice", but let's set the meaningless semantics aside.  My point it that it never has been nor will it ever be a positive institution.  No institution based on the centralization of political, economic, or military power into the hands of an elite minority is going to result in anything less than disaster.  Russia is indeed footing the bill for the coup in Ukraine, at least in part, because they pay into the IMF.  This is what you do not seem to grasp.  The IMF is using capital from the East and West to create conflicts out of thin air.  Russia is just a chess piece in the game, and Putin is just a pawn.

UrbanMiner's picture

Russia provides a pittance to the IMF, a mere token, the vast majority is footed by the U.S., and yes institutions can be converted into useful means, whether blood needs to be spilled in the process is the question.

No institution based on the centralization of political, economic, or military power into the hands of an elite minority is going to result in anything less than disaster. - runningman18

Which is what I've been saying. You lack nuance in every respect, you think because Russia is a member of these internationalist institutions, they somehow are the powerbrokers that decide the fate of nations...they do not belong to that group, sorry. They are viewed by the power elite as barbarians, and perhaps even as pawns, but the Russian pawn has morphed into a rogue Rook.

The Bankers play both sides, I understand your argument, but you fail to see the social currents of their agenda and how they have come upon rocky ground in greater Russia. The goal of Zion is moral decay, unlimited immigration, privatization of all assets, ie the destruction of statehood, yet Russia is doing the opposite on every front. Putin is no saint, you can't run a state without blood on your hands, but the vision of equitable relations coming out of the Russian camp is far more preferable to the alternative reality proposed by the 'chosenite' hierarchy.

runningman18's picture

Now who's putting words in other people's mouths?  I never said Russia or Putin are "powerbrokers".  I did point out that the financial existence of the country relies on global banks, which makes it rather difficult for Putin to be objective in his relationship to globalism.  Russia is not doing the opposite as far as globalization is concerned, it is merely playing a different role from the United States.  Rogue Rook?  Please, I can barely contain my laughter.      Again, you are paying too much attention to what Putin says and not enough attention to what he actually does.  Every action Putin has taken works in the favor of global bankers.  Even his so called opposition to the West is just setting the stage for the IMF to take total control of the world's economies by creating a catalyst for the destruction of the dollar.  I ask again, if Putin is so "rogue", then why does he continually throw support behind the IMF?  Why does he continually seek more power for the international financiers? 

UrbanMiner's picture

Your smugness of the facts, which are obviously very superficially gleaned, blinds you to your ignorance of nuance. Putin is a statesman, interacting with the global body politic requires deftness and compromise, working within the current structure is a situation of prexistent factors. 

I never said Russia or Putin are "powerbrokers".  I did point out that the financial existence of the country relies on global banks, which makes it rather difficult for Putin to be objective in his relationship to globalism. 

Let me be clear here, the Russian government, and Putin are pawns of the global elite, according to you, and are - by all media indications - a major player (power broker  - my words) in the destruction of the U.S. dollar, but they are only being influenced by their inability to remain objective? Just for the record, a power broker is an entity in a position of power who has the will and the capacity to exercise it, regardless of the motives. I'm not placing words anywhere, I'm using logic to deduce your position and it is fairly clear that you have no solution to provide because your use of logic is dull, reflective of someone attempting to use a stone chisel to perform heart surgery.

Russia and therefore Putin are indeed power brokers, but they are not the ones in charge of the IMF, or the international governing bodies, and I'm sure you recognize that, so please inform me as to where this relationship of global banking power and its control of Russia finds manifestation, who is pulling Russia's strings and how? What pressure is Putin bending to?

Regarding the IMF, Putin is one of the minority who criticizes the structure of the IMF and seeks to implement reform, but this is meaningless to you because the IMF is bad, and could never ever be utilized for anything productive....In fact maybe we should just rip it all down, all the institutions of global anything, lets rip them down, fuck it, just start over and torch the fucking place.....It's all just a stage for the Bankers anyways, their tools of power, their organs, nothing good can come of it....

Did you know that the internet, that double edged sword of communication technology and surveillance, was developed by the U.S. department of defense, the internet is bad. 

I'm not laughing out loud, I'm just shaking my head at your simplicity.

ATG's picture

vague references to Putin's KGB background

 

“Mr. Putin is an intelligence officer and his specialty is what is called ‘human intelligence,’ so he had experience recruiting and running agents when he was in Germany and having these agents working for the Soviet intelligence apparatus,” he said.

“As such, I think he considers himself a judge of human character, and he took an assessment of [President Barack] Mr. Obama, [German Chancellor Angela] Mrs. Merkel and others and decided that this is a team he can play against and win”

To understand what is driving Putin with regard to Ukraine, just think back to the days when former Russian leader Boris Yeltsin, weakened both physically and politically, plucked Putin out of the KGB to become his successor in 1999.  

“It was very clear that he believed that Russia had gone through a period, -- a decade -- of socio-economic decline, national humiliation in the 1990s after the breakup of the Soviet Union”

Fast forward to 2014. After spending years successfully engineering a remarkable economic and military comeback, Putin revealed his intentions only days after Crimea was officially annexed.

His message: Russia’s period of geo-political retreat is now over

from

Putin and Crimea: A New World Order?

http://bit.ly/1fD23PM

runningman18's picture

People tend to catch the most flak when they are closest to the target.  Smith's article above is really bringing the trolls out of the woodwork.  I have to say, the contrary responses have been pretty predictable so far.  No susbtance, lots of anger, no real evidence to counter the position of the piece.  Vlad and the banksters have quite a few people suckered.  The East/West scam is no different from the Left/Right scam.  Thanks to Smith for pointing out what should be obvious to everyone.   

HardAssets's picture

Disappointing article.

Many of us have read/heard warnings of those that say Putin is just another member of the new world order crowd & not really a Russian nationalist. While this is a possibility, I haven't read where any of them provided solid evidence for that claim. This article is particularly bad. Come on now - using a supposed statement by Gorbachev to indict Putin ?  Weak.

I was hoping that the article would present strong evidence & logic for the author's claims. Its likely a very good idea to be suspicious of All politicians (especially those on the national and international scene). But this article was a waste of time.

runningman18's picture

Excellent evidence in this article.  It's not just about Putin, just like it's not just about Obama.  Both men are puppets.  To focus solely on either of them is to miss the point.  Smith did a great job of outlining Russia's history of shady dealings with the global bankers through the IMF.  Putin's call for the IMF to issue the SDR as a global currency is evidence enough to implicate him, but then the author throws in the fact that it was Putin who first called for the IMF to take over Ukraine.  Putin is as NWO as they come. 

HardAssets's picture

Well, there's other ways at looking at it. Putin (and the Chinese too) have spoken about broadening the global reserve currency outside of just the US dollar. He proposed the ruble as a regional reserve currency too. Its also likely that the Russians have considerable gold. And, of course, they've set up the structure for doing direct trade deals between Russia & China, bypassing the US dollar for settlement.

I'm no fan of the SDR, but Putin's actions are consistent with someone trying to get out of being controlled by the dollar. And, at this point in time, what alternative would a national political leader be more likely to propose if wanting to get outside the dollar ?   Immediately going to a gold standard ?  Nations that propose that immediately get invaded.  Too much of an instant threat to the existing order.

As to Putin being a 'puppet' - - - of whom ?  And where's the evidence ?

Putin got in after Yeltsin and the oligarchs who stripped away Russia's wealth after the fall of the USSR. Everything I've read about him points to a him being a Russian nationalist. Maybe he's more than that, but haven't seen anything to back that assertion.

Story of the guy who helped bring Putin in :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2304973/Confessions-oligarch-Sho...

 

P.S. - - - I'm not a Putin 'fan boy'. He appears to be a Russian nationalist. That doesn't mean he's the world's savior or Thomas Jefferson

He could be a Russian nationalist and forced to take actions designed to bring about his enemies broader objectives - - - such as the Japanese being goaded into attacking in order to bring the US into WW2.

runningman18's picture

If Putin really wanted to get out from under the thumb of the global bankers then he would denounce the IMF instead of pushing to give them more power.  I have yet to see any Putin apologists give a rational explanation as to why he continues to throw support behind the IMF if he is such an anti-globalist.  

HardAssets's picture

That's like saying 'if you really wanted to stop your car, why don't you slam your brake pedal to the floor' ? Or 'if youre against the global banking cartel, why don't you immediately stop paying all your bank bills and taxes ?'

Because, you take the appropriate actions over time, as required and as youre able to implement.

The current global economic system is what it is. Putin, the Chinese, and a lot of others are questioning the role of the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency. He's also been voal and taken actions regarding the surrounding of Russia by NATO missile bases. Those are the actions of a Russian nationalist.

 

 

runningman18's picture

Your comparison is mediocre at best.  What evidence do you have that Putin is breaking away from the IMF in any capacity?  What evidence do you have to contradict the fact that Putin has already called for the IMF to take control of the global economy?  If all you have are opinions and hypothetical fantasies about what a misunderstood guy Putin is, then I would have to say your position is inadequate.  Again, you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that shows Putin has a contrary or oppositional relationship to the global banks, while there is much evidence to suggest he is working with them, or even for them.  

Being against the U.S. dollar but for a global currency under the IMF is NOT the attitude of a nationalist.  Your logic is faulty, and conveniently dances around Russia's clear support for the IMF.

ATG's picture

China and Russia both had total fiat currency destruction within the lifetime of those in power.

USA not so much since the Continental.

No wonder both are adding to their gold reserves, already 6th and 8th in the world

http://usdebtclock.org/gold-precious-metals.html

China gold demand second to none

http://usdebtclock.org/gold-demand-by-country.html

NuYawkFrankie's picture

re All of this makes Mongo wonder "who" the true, original Bolsheviks really were?

Hint: Their descendants are now running the USSA... and they ain't Irish.

MeMongo's picture

Frankie i'll double down and bet they aint Amish neither:-)

NuYawkFrankie's picture

I hear ya MrMongo - comin' thru Loud'n Clear ;)

Pure Evil's picture

I didn't know they had a group of extra-terrestrials called Snohomish.

I thought they were called the Anunnakis.

magpie's picture

Actually they aren't from Jupiter. They are Martians but not of the Reptilian or Draconian variety. Someone crossbred them with a spider species and the rest is history.

Pure Evil's picture

So, if we're gonna go all conspiracy nuts here, then I can only guess you're talking about the Raëlians?

magpie's picture

Should be interesting to watch how the aliens react to those people...

free_lunch's picture
Freedom of Speech In The West Is Constrained By The "Conspiracy Theory" Label.

This label is the peaceful way of cutting off a heretic's head in the West. It is less savage than the Islamic method of dealing with heretics and blasphemous disbelievers, but it is just as effective.

People who use the label "conspiracy theorist" in a debate are intellectual savages who have the sword of error in their hand. They can't win the battle of ideas with rational arguments so they pull out their sword and tell you to submit to the official story line or face the axe of ridicule. The individuals who refuse to kneel are branded as "conspiracy theorists," and "crazy truthers."

An honest debater uses facts and logic to make his point. When facts and logic lead to unwanted conclusions the "conspiracy nut" is the emergency exit which has proven to be effective on small minds. This technique is used in other variations as well.

Kind of like a colored person that is caught stealing starts screaming "racism" when indicted, things turn around, now the victim is the one that has to defend himself proving he/she is not a racist, but solely a victim of a crime which happens to be committed by a colored person. All attention is diverted from the crime.

It is effective and will stay effective, simply because the masse are ******

 

 

 

ATG's picture

The most effective antidote to ad hominem attacks including "conspiracy theory" is to calmly ask the attacker to document their facts that it is not a conspiracy.

Works every time.

Rafferty's picture

The Bolsheviks were dominated by Jewish figures such as Lenin himself  (spoke Yiddish at home), Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Yorovsky and Sverdlov (who ordered the murder of the Czar's family).  Stalin himself had a Jewish wife and  the first Soviet commissariats were largely staffed with Jews.  Almost all changed their Germanic real names to Russian names, e.g. Zonoviev's real name was Gershon Apfelbaum.

 

Many of their decsendants 'escaped' from USSR/Russia and landed in..........Wall Street!

ATG's picture

Stalin's jewish name was Joseph David Djugashvili (Joe Jewison)

At one time he used the name "Kochba", the leader of the Jews during one of the anti-Roman uprisings of the Jews

Georgians didn't change their names

 

http://bit.ly/1lITXN3

Pseudonymous's picture

This is something everyone should listen to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEipMmxSlGU (lecture by Antony C. Sutton).

Philalethian's picture

"All of this makes Mongo wonder "who" the true, original Bolsheviks really were?"

Professional liars and deceivers that ware masks well to hide behind. They also call money god, and profit from war and the deaths of millions of innocents. It has been a century of deceit.:

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2014/04/04/a-century-of-deceit-iraq-the-w...

 

ATG's picture

Somehow it doesn’t dawn on them that maybe it is their unscrupulous behavior that is the cause of hostility towards them in the first place. Obviously introspection is not exactly a Zionist virtue