An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last (Winston Churchill)

Peace for our time 1938 2013

Russian president’s 41-minute speech on Oct 24 at a conference in Moscow has been reverberating around the world through the internet media. Here are some quotes from it…

“Global media control allows US to sell black for white”

“The US has been destabilizing the world order of checks and balances for its own gains”

“It never ceases to amaze me how our partners have been guilty of making the same mistakes time and again”

You can see some more quotes in the images below.

35 4

Predictably, the western establishment press has remained mostly critical of the speech, as befits obedient New World Order regime lapdogs. The New York Times, for example, called Putin’s remarks a “diatribe” (see Putin Accuses U.S. of Backing ‘Neo-Fascists’ and ‘Islamic Radicals’).

“Instead of supporting democracy and sovereign states… the United States 1putin-speech-best-quotes.sisupports “dubious” groups ranging from “open neo-fascists to Islamic radicals,” the NYT quoted Putin as saying. 

“Why do they support such people?”, he asked the annual gathering known as the Valdai Club in the southern resort town of Sochi. 

The goal of the United States, he said, was to try to create a unipolar world in which American interests went unchallenged.

Putin Said Nothing New, so why all the fuss?

What’s interesting about the media reactions to Putin’s Oct 24 speech is that he actually said nothing new. Here’s a quote from his March 18 speech to the Russian Duma about the then annexation of Crimea into Russia (see Putin Lashes Out at Washington Treachery, Mar 19).

“Our western partners, led by the United States of America, prefer not to be guided by international law in their practical policies, but by the rule of the gun. They have come to believe in their exclusivity and Screen Shot 2014-03-19 at 8.55.50 AMexceptionalism, that they can decide the destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right. They act as they please: here and there, they use force against sovereign states, building coalitions based on the principle “If you are not with us, you are against us.”

To make this aggression look legitimate, they force the necessary resolutions from international organizations, and if for some reason this does not work, they simply ignore the UN Security Council and the UN overall.”

Obama: Lumping Russia, Ebola and Terrorism

Truth vs Power

Despite its usual Russophobic bias, the New York Times Oct 25 article did contain a pearl, a kernel of truth wrapped inside Washington’s diatribe:

“Since Russia granted asylum to Edward J. Snowden, the American intelligence contractor, and the crisis in Ukraine, President Obama has increased pressure on the Kremlin, lumping Russia together with Ebola and terrorism as key threats to world stability.”

So what do Russia, Ebola and terrorism have in common to warrant lumping them together, as Obama has done? In one sense – nothing. In another – Snowden.

All three were “made in USA” crises, manufactured by the Washington Crisis Factory (a 1999 essay). But Snowden’s revelations about all sorts of illegal and criminal activities the US government is involved in has enraged the would-be New World Order leaders who are not accustomed to public scrutiny (see Edward Snowden wins alternative Nobel prize, Sep 2014).

Russia’s “fault” was to have agreed to shelter Snowden from the shackles of the New World Order jackals.

There is no greater enemy to the mob leaders than when one of them turns rogue.” (Truth in Media)

So Washington mobsters have ratcheted up the pressure on Russia by engineering a coup d’etat in Ukraine and the civil war that followed. Just as they did two decades ago with Slobodan Milosevic, another one of their “partners” who went rogue when he became president of Serbia. And to Saddam Hussein, another NWO “partner” from the Iran-Iraq war who took a Washington bait reached out for “a country too far” (Kuwait). chamberlain-plane-ticket-pic-collect-178249005

Another useful lesson history can offer is what happened in 1938 when the British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, thought he could negotiate a peace treaty with Hitler. His words “peace for our time” ended up in the laughing stock of history considering the world war II that followed.

Is Putin Naive or False?

Given these recent and distant lessons from history, one must wonder – is Putin naive, like Chamberlain, or false, like Gorbachov?

For, Putin is still referring to the Washington mobsters as “partners” even as he attempts to criticize them. And he seems to be still holding out hope that he can somehow negotiate with them.article-2343392-1A5EE249000005DC-338_634x479

That’s no more realistic than negotiating with drug cartel bosses in Mexico or Colombia. Or with crocodiles like Hitler.

So is he false then? Is he really a “double agent,” a part of the NWO crowd who is playing the role of the enemy?  As Gorbachov did during the “glasnost” era, a prelude to the Soviet Union collapse?

That’s a possibility.


Because the Washington mob made Putin feel like one of them. For 13 years to be exact, the New World Order leaders treated Putin as a sort of a junior partner. When he ascended to the Russian presidency in 2000, he was a newby without much international experience. Putin succeeded a western stooge whose drinking problem made him an unreliable NWO “partner” (Yeltsin).

Yet even Yeltsin had not abandoned Russia’s friends as Putin has done. But back in 2003, when Putin naively thought Russia was also an NWO member in good standing, he sold out the Serbs and pulled the Russian troops out of Kosovo, as he had done a month earlier in Bosnia. Thus he effectively threw the entire Balkan peninsula into NATO/American lap.

By contrast, Yeltsin sent the Russian troops to Kosovo in June 1999 and grabbed the Pristina airport before NATO had even arrived. And the Russians had been a key Bosnia peacekeeping force ever since that Balkan conflict escalated in 1992-1993.

“Power tends to corrupt,” Lord Acton noted, “and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Access to power on the world scene might have gone to the head of the relatively minor KGB apparatchik from Saint Petersburg. Putin seemed to revel in rubbing shoulders with the global dignitaries. For a while…

That came to an abrupt halt after Russia granted Snowden the asylum in Russia in Putin BushamaAug of last year (see Snowden Freed by Russia, US Government Furious; Editorial: Political Pole Shift: Cold War Role Reversal, Aug 1, 2013). Yet hoping to ingratiate himself to the New World Order masters, Putin had warned Snowden to “stop leaking US secrets.”

That was a strategic miscalculation by the Russian president. For, it cost him the membership in the NWO club. He has since been disinvited from all global leadership events except for those Russia sponsored (such as BRICS meetings – see Parallel Wars). Unlike the “spy who came in from the cold,” he and Russia have been cast side to freeze in isolation.

That Putin is now badmouthing the club of which he used to be a member sounds more like sour grapes of a jolted lover than rebellious statesmanship.

But one thing is for sure. There is no turning back for him. Or for Russia. Perhaps unwittingly, when Putin granted Snowden the asylum, he cast himself and his country on a new path. Ironically, it is the path the New World Order has always intended for Russia (see Ukraine: NATO’s Latest Drang Nach West Target, Feb 2014).

It was a delusion from which Yeltsin also suffered that Russia was anything but an USSR_Republics_Numbered_Alphabetically (1)adversary in the eyes of the Washington would-be world masters. They dealt with her the same way Roman emperors dealt with conquests – using the “divide and conquer” tactics. They busted up the Soviet Union into 15 pieces (1. Armenia; 2. Azerbaijan; 3. Belarus; 4. Estonia; 5. Georgia; 6. Kazakhstan; 7. Kyrgyzstan; 8. Latvia; 9. Lithuania; 10. Moldova; 11. Russia; 12. Tajikistan; 13. Turkmenistan; 14. Ukraine; 15. Uzbekistan). And then they proceeded to set them against Russia using financial and military incentives.

Since all this was obvious to this writer 20 years ago, one would think that the Russian president must have been aware of it, too. Yet Putin continued to cavort with the crocodile hoping for what? That it would eat him last, Churchill put it.

Until Snowden turned up in Moscow. That became the watershed event for Putin, whether or not he realized it at the time. And a wake up call for Russia.

As a result, Russia may be out in the cold now. But at least has no illusions about any western “partnerships for peace” which lead to subjugation or wars.

“U se i u svoje kljuse,” goes an old Serbian proverb. You can only trust yourself and your own horse.  Which was a realization at which Churchill also arrived 75 years ago.

* * *

Parallels Between pre-World War II and Current World Situation

Causes of World War Two

The causes of World War Two can be divided into long term causes and short term causes. There can be little doubt that one of the long term causes of the war was the anger felt in Weimar Germany that was caused by the Treaty of Versailles. Another long term cause was the obvious inability of the League of Nations to deal with major international issues. In the 1930’s these would have been in Manchuria andAbyssinia. In both conflicts the League showed that it was unable to control those powers that worked outside of accepted international law. In the case of Manchuria it was Japan and in Abyssinia it was Mussolini’s Italy.

With such apparent weakness, Hitler must have known that at the very least he could push the boundaries and see what he could get away with. His first major transgression was his defiance of the Versailles Treaty when he introduced re-armament into Nazi Germany. The expansion of all three arms of the military was forbidden by treaty. Hitler, however, ignored these restrictions. The world’s powers did nothing. The same occurred in 1936 when Nazi Germany re-occupied the Rhineland. Forbidden by Versailles, Hitler felt confident enough to ignore it. Europe’s failure to react was also demonstrated when Austria and the Sudentenland were occupied.

CURRENT SITUATION: A similar thing happened between 1999 and 2004 as NATO kept expanding eastward:

12 March 1999  Czech Republic Fourth
29 March 2004  Bulgaria Fifth
1 April 2009  Albania Sixth

And now, Washington and NATO have their sights set on adding Ukraine to its membership.

Back to lessons from history…

Czech Crisis of 1938 Like Ukrainian Crisis of 2014

Only when it became obvious that Hitler was determined to expand east and that what was left of Czechoslovakia and region Poland were to be his next targets, did the major powers of  Europe react. Hitler’s reference to the Munich Agreement as a “scrap of paper” made clear his intentions. However, in 1938, very many in the UK had supported Neville Chamberlain’s attempts at avoiding war (appeasement) and public opinion was on his side. This only changed when it became clear that appeasement had failed and the public rallied to the side of Winston Churchill – the man who had insisted that Chamberlain had taken the wrong course of action.


Ever since the end of the Cold War, and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the New World Order has been tightening its grip around Russia’s neck. For over two decades, Moscow lived an illusion that it will be treated as an equal partner. Nothing was further from the truth.

nato-map 1995 3 rings around russia 1995 nato-map 2014

The Truth in Media has published numerous articles in the 1990s that pointed out NATO’s true intentions and the fact that Russia was still the “Bogey No. 1,” as we put it. So only a New World Order Moscow stooge, like Boris Yeltsin, and later also Putin, could have believed otherwise.

* * *

Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.25.23 AM

Vladimir Putin: Prime Minister, Action Man, Crooner (ABC News, Dec 2010)

On a lighter note, when Putin was still in between his two presidencies, biding his time as a prime minister, he organized a charity event in his native Saint Petersburg in December 2010 to raise funds for the cancer-stricken children. Such was his drawing power at the time that he attracted “who’s who” of Hollywood to the event. And then he proceeded to entertain them by singing a song he learned while studying English.

Putin Sings “Blueberry Hill” for Children Cancer Charity

* * *

Wonder how many of these Hollywood celebrities would care to be seen now as Putin cheerleaders? 🙂

Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.23.05 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.24.43 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.27.18 AMScreen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.24.14 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 8.27.06 AM  As for Putin, well, at least he has a backup career as a crooner in Saint Petersburg as his singing days in the NWO Club are over. 🙂

By contrast, can you imagine Obama singing in public? God forbid, right? The man seems completely devoid of any artistic talents.

Yet Hollywood celebrities tripped over each other and their wallets to cheer him on, both in 2008 and in 2012. No talent – no problem, when it comes to Hollywood.


* * *


6 responses to “IS PUTIN NAIVE OR FALSE?”


    […] The last time we did it earlier this month in a piece about “Putin the appeaser” (see IS PUTIN NAIVE OR COY? – NOV 3, 2014). But now have it in black and white after the Nov 21 UN vote. Or should I […]


    […] over a year ago, I published an editorial on Putin – “IS PUTIN NAIVE OR COY?, NOVEMBER 3, […]


    […] that promise line, hook and sinker. As did Putin, too, in the early days of his presidency (see IS PUTIN NAIVE OR COY?, […]


    […] that promise line, hook and sinker. As did Putin, too, in the early days of his presidency (see IS PUTIN NAIVE OR COY?, […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: