Suppose all we see with Russia

Is precisely to destroy the West

I am going out on a limb. The esteemed Michael Hudson suggests “the most enormous unintended consequence of US foreign policy has been to drive Russia and China together, along with Iran, Central Asia and countries along the Belt and Road initiative.”

I see.

Or I do not. Russia has bought the Executive Branch some years ago, perhaps before Obama, also multiple members of elite class in Europe and USA. Who Russia could not corrupt China did. The Russians were tight with the WEF, that most curious Leninist “woke Oligarch body.” The WEF wants the global USSR.

Russia is using this war with the help of their Western frenemies to become even tighter with China, that curious Hyper-Capitalist Iron Rice Bowl country. Pepe Escobar “So the US itself, in another massive strategic blunder, will speed up de-dollarization. As the managing director of Bocom International Hong Hao told the Global Times, with energy trade between Europe and Russia de-dollarized, “that will be the beginning of the disintegration of dollar hegemony.”

Strategic blunder. No I think not. Chicom Joe “Ukraine” Biden and his merry morons make policy. Escobar continues discussing US policy outcomes -as set forth by J.P Morgan and Citi group. A Bloomberg article sums up their collective fears:

“Booting Russia from the critical global system – which handles 42 million messages a day and serves as a lifeline to some of the world’s biggest financial institutions – could backfire, sending inflation higher, pushing Russia closer to China, and shielding financial transactions from scrutiny by the west. It might also encourage the development of a SWIFT alternative that could eventually damage the supremacy of the US dollar.”

Those with IQs over 50 in the European Union (EU) must have understood that Russia simply could not be totally excluded from SWIFT, but maybe only a few of its banks: after all, European traders depend on Russian energy.

From Moscow’s point of view, that’s a minor issue. A number of Russian banks are already connected to China’s CIPS system. For instance, if someone wants to buy Russian oil and gas with CIPS, payment must be in the Chinese yuan currency. CIPS is independent of SWIFT.

Additionally, Moscow already linked its SPFS payment system not only to China but also to India and member nations of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU). SPFS already links to approximately 400 banks.

With more Russian companies using SPFS and CIPS, even before they merge, and other maneuvers to bypass SWIFT, such as barter trade – largely used by sanctioned Iran – and agent banks, Russia could make up for at least 50 percent in trade losses.

The key fact is that the flight from the US-dominated western financial system is now irreversible across Eurasia – and that will proceed in tandem with the internationalization of the yuan. http://thesaker.is/follow-the-money-how-russia-will-bypass-western-economic-warfare/

Anatoliy Golitsyn – The Perestroika Deception

The Perestroika Deception is a sequel to Anatoliy Golitsyn’s famous work New Lies for Old, published in 1984, which accurately predicted the preplanned removal of the Berlin Wall, ‘collapsible Communism’ and all the deceptive Leninist strategic events of 1989-91. Golitsyn wrote in New Lies for Old:

The feigned disunity of the communist world promotes real disunity in the noncommunist world…. False alignments, formed with third parties by each side against the other, make it easier to achieve specific communist goals, such as the acquisition of advanced technology or the negotiation of arms control agreements or communist penetration of Arab and African states. In Western eyes the military, political, economic, and ideological threat from world communism appears diminished. [1]

Communist strategy has long used the tactic of “controlled opposition” to deceive and lull their enemies into complacency. The purpose of “false opposition” is to further confuse and undermine any genuine opposition in the communist world. Vladimir I. Lenin best summed up the dialectical strategy of controlled opposition by stating, “The best way for us to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”

The dialectic of this offensive consists of a calculated shift from the old, discredited Soviet practice to a new, “liberalized” model, with a social democratic facade, to realize the communist planners’ strategy for establishing a United Europe. At the beginning they introduced a variation of the 1968 Czechoslovakian “democratization.” At a later phase they will shift to a variation of the Czechoslovakian takeover of 1948. [2]

Granted, when one examines claims by former intelligence operatives who allege to have “seen the light” and are now trying to warn us for solely altruistic reasons, one should exercise a healthy amount of caution and skepticism. They may be acting as a double-agent; or they could be an outright fraud altogether. So it is wise to test their claims and allegations and ask oneself, “To whose benefit?” Does it stack up? How do their revelations compare to other defectors of a similar vein?

What makes Anatoliy Golitsyn stand out is the uncanny accuracy of his predictions. Mark Riebling wrote in his spy book Wedge: The Secret War between the FBI and the CIA, “[O]f Golitsyn’s falsifiable predictions, 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the end of 1993—an accuracy rate of 94 percent.” [3]

One of the goals behind the Soviet Union’s “false liberalization” facade was to put a “happy face” on Soviet-style communism. Golitsyn predicted the emergence of a “younger leader with a more liberal image, who will continue the liberalization more intensely.” [4] By falling for the Soviet “liberalization” ploy, the West begins to question its massive defense expenditures; since it seems wasteful and unnecessary now that the “Cold War” is allegedly a thing of the past.

Both Golitsyn books expose the Soviet Bolshevik strategy to procure the establishment of World (Communist) Governance. Western participants in this long-range plan collaborated with the Soviets to procure the ‘fall’of the Soviet Union, but failed to understand that they were being double-crossed by the Soviets – who have covertly persisted with their dimension of the World Revolution as though nothing really changed: which it didn’t. There was no true strategic discontinuity in 1989-91 – merely a Leninist (deceptive) discontiniuty to hoodwink the West.

Now “hoodwink” I disagree. Collaborate as Frenemies. Each move the controlled West makes intentionally advances the Sino-Russian order.