Bolshevism in Brazil

Anyone paying attention to South America is alarmed, though not surprised, at the rapid rise of Bolshevism. Venezuela isn’t the only Latin American nation to be consumed by communists and turned into a wasteland. A communist was recently elected to the presidency in Chile, though, fortunately, the people had enough sense to vote down his attempt to rewrite their constitution. In Mexico, a literal Marxist holds the reins of power. In Colombia, a radical leftist was elected earlier this year. Argentina is likewise radically socialist. And on the communist encroachments in the Americas go. 

Brazil is world Bolshevism’s most recent target. In what was an even more blatantly fraudulent election than the 2020 U.S. election swindle, President Jair Bolsonaro, the “Trump of the Tropics,” allegedly lost to the radical convicted felon and communist front man Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Lula, as he is known, had little popular support, just like bumbling Biden had no popular support. Bolsonaro, like Trump, drew massive patriotic crowds and had an energized base of supporters across the spectrum. In 2020, Trump-endorsed candidates won handily in most parts of the United States. In Brazil this November, Bolsonaro-allied politicians nearly swept the board. Yet, despite all this, like Trump in 2020, Bolsonaro supposedly lost the presidency by a razor-thin margin with statistically impossible ballot drops coming in at the last moment to sweep the Establishment’s Marxist candidate into office. 

There is a difference between how America and Brazil have handled this election theft, however. In the United States, we took it sitting down. We did nothing! We waved a few flags, wrote some angry internet posts, filed a few lawsuits in rigged courts, and gathered for a few hours in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021. That’s it. 

The largest population of armed, Freedom-first patriots in the world, who are descended from the Sons of Liberty and stalwarts like George Washington and Patrick Henry, did nothing! We who have the biggest bounty of Liberty in the world, the greatest heritage of Freedom of any nation, and the most inspired and enduring Constitution mankind has ever produced, sat by as our sovereignty, election, and voice, were brazenly stolen by an international cabal of rabid communist jackals. 

The fact that we have done nothing, and that we have allowed election theft to continue in 2022, was and is an embarrassment and a scorching indictment of how weak and immoral we’ve become. Personally, I was disappointed on January 6, 2021, when I learned that the initial media reports of an insurrection at the Capitol were false. The time for 1776 2.0 arrived long ago and I believe that Lexington and Concord 2.0 is around the corner. If not, then America has no future. If we refuse to fight, we deserve our chains and collectivist thralldom. 

This is where Brazil is different. Brazil has a history of being attacked by communist forces and fighting back. These attempts at saving Brazil from an alien threat have often been tumultuous and authoritarian, yet they show a strain of Brazilian patriotism and willingness to act that is relevant to the current situation. 

Several moments in Brazilian history are illustrative. In November of 1935, for instance, communist military infiltrators staged an uprising. Backed by the Soviet Union via the Comintern, these traitors attempted to seize control of the Brazilian state. Luís Carlos Prestes, seen by some as Brazil’s Lenin, headed up the communist movements there. He had previously been in the military and led troops to radicalize the nation. He failed and was driven into exile. 

In exile, he moved to the Soviet Union. In 1935, he returned to Brazil as the head of the Brazilian Communist Party. He immediately enlisted certain military leaders in his plot to seize the Brazilian state and brought together the National Liberation Alliance (ANL) for the purpose. Eighteen years to the month after Lenin launched his revolution that led to the Satanic Soviet Union, Prestes initiated his own coup d’état. 

The attempted overthrow of the Brazilian state by communists was crushed by the military and resulted in an even stronger military regime consolidated under President Getulio Vargas. Unsurprisingly, Vargas was accused of being a fascist. Anyone, and any nation, who goes up against the communist conspiracy is shrilly accused of being “fascist,” “Nazi,” “anti-Semitic,” “extremist,” “right-wing,” etc. 

When you read Soviet communications, it becomes evident they feared the so-called “fascists” more than they feared capitalists. For instance, Stalin laughed at France and talked about how easy it would be to take over the country, but he was gravely worried about Hitler’s Germany which was the most heated anti-communist nation that has ever existed. Capitalists are often seen as the opposites of communists, but I submit that so-called “fascists” have traditionally been greater enemies to communism than the capitalists which deliberately built up the Soviet Union and Red China through aid and extension of diplomatic ties. 

Simply read Antony Sutton’s books The Best Enemy Money Can Buy, National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union, and Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution to become satisfied on this point. Throw in Gary Allen’s None Dare Call It Conspiracy for good measure. The reality is that capitalism is communism and that the biggest supporters of communism throughout the globe have been simultaneously the biggest capitalists – the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, the Federal Reserve, the Bank of London, and many more  

It was not the vaunted “capitalist” nations that created the Anti-Comintern Pact. That was Hitler’s Germany, Hirohito’s Japan, and Mussolini’s Italy. Shouldn’t it make you question the Establishment’s baseless historical narrative about WWII to know that the three nations most demonized are the three nations that stood up and formally fought communism? People with intellectual honesty discard that bogus distortion of history and know better. 

For a time, under Vargas, Brazil stood with Germany and Italy. Germany was Brazil’s biggest European trading partner. Both states opposed communism and had experience dealing with communist insurrections. Germany regarded Vargas’ government highly and expressed its view that Brazil had the most promising future of all Latin American states. There was even a relatively vibrant Germanic population in Brazil which supported the Reich. 

Vargas was a nationalist, though, who also had to deal with U.S. influence. He walked a fine line and played both sides. Under pressure from international elements, Vargas eventually cracked down on the German people in Brazil and banned the swastika. During the early parts of the war, Brazil followed a path of neutrality. That is, until the United States stopped being neutral. 

In truth, from day one, FDR intervened in European affairs. He supported Great Britain with raw materials and weapons – much like the United States is doing in Ukraine today. In supporting a combatant which was a war, the United States violated its neutrality status and, in reality, joined Britain’s side in the war against Germany. FDR used dirty tricks to tempt Germany’s U-Boats to attack them as a pretext to get us to war. Hitler didn’t take the bait. FDR also sent billions of dollars of supplies, tanks, and war materials, to the Soviet Union when Germany preemptively struck them to avert Stalin’s impending invasion. 

However, the world situation changed on December 7, 1941, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. FDR is as much to blame for this strike as any Japanese leader. He wanted it to happen. He adopted a secret eight-point plan to make it happen. He strangled Japan economically. He froze Japan’s assets. Without Japan having done anything to the United States, FDR put Japan in a position of total economic collapse. 

With its back against the wall, Japan felt the only thing it could do was retaliate and use the chaos of war to seize the raw materials it needed to survive. FDR, knowing of Japan’s intentions to attack Peral Harbor because our intelligence community had broken Japan’s civil and military codes, allowed the deadly event in order to get us into war with not only Japan, but, more importantly, Germany. 

Because of its treaties with Japan, Germany declared war on the United States – precisely as FDR desired. From that moment on, any nation sending materials to the United States left neutral ground and became a target. Enter Brazil. After several Brazilian ships had been attacked, and FDR declined to give Vargas the naval escorts he asked for, Brazil declared war on Germany in August 1942. 

Despite turning against a power that could’ve been a true ally against the forces of international conspiracy and destruction, Vargas made a deal with the Devil. In 1945, he was forced out of office through another military coup. According to a paper I read, he later said he was a “victim of agents of international finance.” Specifically, the Rockefellers were heavily involved capturing parts of the Brazilian economy under Vargas’ rule. This international clique of gangsters is precisely what Hitler had warned about and why he was targeted for destruction by the most bloodthirsty agents of international finance – the communists. Vargas suffered a similar fate. 

On March 31, 1964, influenced by CIA scheming, U.S. military backing, and approval first by President Kennedy and eventually by President Johnson, another coup overthrew the leftist President João Goulart. In 1962, Robert Kennedy met with Goulart and expressed concern that Brazil was being taken over by hardline communist infiltrators. Mainstream “historians” today call the 1950s in Latin America a period of “democratization.” “Democratization” is a codeword for something more sinister. In The Communist Manifesto, Marx said that the first step to installing communism is to democratize a nation. The military coup of 1964, in its final equation, was conducted, with American support, to stamp out communism in Brazil. 

The military takeover was not intended to last forever, yet it lasted for 21 years because communists counterattacked with guerilla groups and domestic terrorism. This was a major Soviet strategy in the 1960s and 70s. The Marxist terrorists kidnapped diplomats and politicians, including Burke Elbrick, the U.S. ambassador. They waged war against the government. They failed, however, as the Brazilian military fought fire with fire. 

It is worth noting that at this time, the Cold War, the communists tried everything they could to seize South and Central America. They were highly successful, though certain nations fought back. In Chile, for instance, General Augusto Pinochet took power with the military in 1973. Why? To fight communist infiltration and subversion. 

Just like the Brazilian coup is criticized, so, too, is Pinochet criticized. The Establishment press paints them as “fascists,” “Nazis,” and “right-wing oppressors,” yet, like Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and others throughout the world, they did what they did as a last desperate measure to save their nations from Bolshevist bondage. If/when American patriots finally take up arms and fight back, it will be in retaliation to the long-term communist attempt to subvert and seize control of the United States. 

Back to Brazil. At the end of this round of twenty-one years of fighting, newly-founded Brasilia was made into the capital city and a transition from military to civilian authority took place. In 1988, Brazil adopted a new constitution. More on the constitution later. 

In 2002, a certain radical Marxist by the name of Lula was elected to the presidency along with his “Workers’ Party” (PT). Lula is a massive internationalist who ushered Brazil into BRICS – the anti-West alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. He simultaneously supports the United Nations, World Economic Forum, and essentially every other duplicitous world body. 

At the end of his tenure, Lula was thrown into prison for embezzlement and corruption, where he should still be today. He was sentenced for 12 years, which began in 2018. Yet, after less than two years, Lula was busted out of prison by the massively leftist Brazilian Supreme Court. Justice Edson Fachin later annulled the former decisions, allowing Lula to run for president yet again. 

It reminds me of how convicted communist terrorist Nelson Mandela was imprisoned for his crimes, yet later released after his communist allies agreed to put him on the throne in South Africa as their front man. Mandela was an occultist and convicted terrorist who belonged to the Executive Committee of South Africa’s Communist Party. Lula is a convicted criminal whose biggest allies are admitted communists. Brazil, remember the hellhole that South Africa became when Mandela took control. Don’t let it happen to your country. 

Throughout the years, and more recently in 2022 during the election campaigns, Lula has received public support from some of the most radical groups on the planet. These include the Chinese Communist Party, the Russian Communist Party, the Brazilian Communist Party and Communist Party of Brazil, Venezuela’s Maduro, and other overtly Marxist organs and activists. 

Lula and his comrade Putin

In 2018, when Lula was thrown in the slammer, the Communist Party of Russia sent a message to Brazil, published by Lula’s Workers’ Party, a portion of which I translated roughly from Portuguese: 

“It is obvious to us that all charges against the Lula are prepared by the right forces with assistance of the USA. Reactionary forces don’t want to allow Lula’s elections. However, Honesty of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva at anybody doesn’t raise doubts! We protest against repressions concerning Lula, and we believe that workers of Brazil will remember the traditions of the October revolution in Russia to protect the leader!” 

In 2021, Lula praised the Chinese Communist Party, saying that it makes China powerful. He called the CCP’s regime a “model” for the world. He also said that while he’d like to maintain relations with the United States, it’s more important for him to secure a relationship with Red China and Russia. 

Germany’s Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, which honors the Jewish communist who was put to death in Germany after her failed attempt to lead a revolution and install a Soviet-style government, showed its support for Lula this past August. It used the usual talking points to criticize Bolsonaro while talking up Lula who was presented as a hero. They said

“The chose facing Brazilian voters on 2 October could not be more stark: either four more years of Jair Bolsonaro, the gun-loving, God-fearing right-wing populist whose time in office has seen hundreds of thousands of COVID-19 deaths and record levels of destruction to the Amazon rainforest, or the return of Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, the Workers’ Party (PT) icon who governed Brazil from 2003 to 2010. . . . 

“There are a couple of ways of describing Lula. One that’s very common is that he’s the best president Brazil ever had. With all the contradictions, problems, and all of the other things we have criticized him for — he was the best president, and he was very concerned with people’s well-being. The understanding that you need to lift people out of poverty, to make sure that they’re eating well, that they have good jobs ­— this is all very much a priority for Lula, and I think that’s what makes him stand out. 

“He’s also a very skilled politician, in the sense that he’s able to put people together in a room and create consensus when nobody else thought it was possible. That’s quite positive considering how politically fragmented Brazilian society is, both in terms of consciousness as well as political organizations. . . . 

“. . . we have the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB), which is fairly moderate compared to the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB), which is a more traditional Marxist-Leninist party. The PCdoB has been very close to the PT for a long time and was part of its governments. 

“Particularly under Bolsonaro, there’s been some convergence between the PT and PSOL. This makes sense in terms of building a strong alliance against Bolsonaro, but it also has created tensions within PSOL, and some people left as a result. Overall, however, the membership has grown. It’s still quite small compared to the PT, but it has become more relevant in certain sectors of society. 

“Three smaller parties on the radical Left, including the PCB and the Unified Workers’ Socialist Party (PSTU), a Trotskyist party that broke with Lula long before his first term, are running their own candidates. Everyone else backs Lula. It won’t really impact the election, because they don’t have enough support to make a difference, but it does reflect the increase in public debate around socialism and communism in Brazil. Just as anti-communism has spread under Bolsonaro, so have communist ideas.” 

In October of this year, the infamous People’s World reported

“Brazil’s Communist Party leader Luciana Santos called on the left to “occupy the streets” to guarantee a Lula victory in the second round of presidential elections in four weeks. . . . 

“. . . The Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB) and the Greens both joined forces with Lula’s Workers Party to back him for president. . . . 

“Regional left leaders congratulated Lula on his first-place showing, with congratulations coming from Bolivia’s Luis Arce, Argentina’s Alberto Fernández, Colombia’s Gustavo Petro and Mexico’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador.” 

Later, after Lula allegedly “won” the absurdly rigged election, the South China Morning Post editorialized

“Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s victory in Brazil’s run-off election on Sunday will help strengthen ties with China, Brazil’s top trading partner, and the BRICS countries, according to analysts. . . . 

“The leftist heavyweight had opened dialogue with Beijing during his first administration and in 2009 helped Brazil form BRICS – a group of leading emerging economies that comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. 

“Chinese President Xi Jinping congratulated Lula on his win in the presidential election, adding that China and Brazil’s “long-standing friendship is conducive to maintaining regional and world peace and stability and promoting common development and prosperity”. 

“China’s foreign ministry also congratulated Lula on his election win, with spokesman Zhao Lijian saying China was willing to work with Lula’s new administration to “promote the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Brazil to a new level”. 

“During Lula’s administration from 2003 to 2010, Brazil saw China as a key partner in helping to restructure the international order. In 2004, Lula drew closer to Beijing, leading a delegation of more than 450 business leaders to China to lay the foundations for a partnership that intertwined the economies of both countries. During Lula’s presidency, he met former Chinese president Hu Jintao eight times.” 

Remember, Lula praised China and said they were a “model” for the world. China congratulated Lula, having helped him come to power through a scam election that ousted Brazil’s popular patriot Bolsonaro. 

We should remember that when communists celebrate, freemen have cause to mourn. It’s significant that China is so supportive of Lula. On the whole, Lula’s most vocal supporters were radical communists, criminal cartels, and foreign communists. And it’s no wonder. Lula is the criminal – literally convicted criminal, remember – who hitched Brazil to Red China. If he is inaugurated on January 1, he will plunge Brazil farther into serfdom to communist China and the international cabal. 

Before discussing the potential of military intervention to stop this madness, let’s quickly discuss how the election was stolen. Recall that there were two elections. The first, on October 2, saw Lula the winner. But even that election was fraudulent. The Gateway Pundit reported: 

“On Sunday, October 2nd, contrary to all predictions, Bolsonaro was leading at 7:22 pm local time, with 47.01% of the votes (22,028,936 votes) and 44.16% for Lula da Silva (20,693,810 votes), with 41.19% of the votes counted. At 7:55 pm local time, with 60.33% counted, Bolsonaro lead with 32,049,235 votes (46.01%) and Lula da Silva was closing 31,484,583 votes (45.20%) 

“As the tide miraculously turned, Lula da Silva took the lead, with 50,181,166 votes (47.12%) versus 47,206,466 votes (44.32%) for Bolsonaro at 8:30 pm, with 90.26% of the votes counted. The tally ended up with 57,357,473 votes for Lula da Silva (48,43%) and 51,071,106 votes for Bolsonaro (43,20%) at 5:14 am Oct. 3, with 99,99% of votes counted. 

“Disregarding the votes for other candidates, this means that Bolsonaro received 51.57% of votes cast for either candidate up until 7:22 pm, and Lula da Silva 48.43%. Between 7:22 pm and 5:14 am the next morning, Bolsonaro received only 44.20% of votes cast for either candidate, and Lula da Silva 55.80%. It was not clear what could have caused such a huge statistical anomaly. 

“Voters shared videos that appeared to show a voting machine no longer accepting a vote for Bolsonaro. 

“Remarkably, Bolsonaro  allegedly lost in the state of Minas Gerais, where he began his 2022 election campaign and was almost stabbed to death by an assassin in 2018. In the same state, his candidate for the Chamber of Deputies, Nicolas Ferreira,  won by a landslide, by 1,492,047 votes to 238,967 for the socialist opponent André Janones. 

“While Bolsonaro allegedly lost to Lula da Silva, his Liberal Party was the clear winner and largest party in Parliament, with 24.9% in the Senate and 16.5% in the Chamber of Deputies – another seeming anomaly.” 

So-called “anomalies” that sweep radical Marxists into power over popularly patriotic candidates have become frequent in multiple countries in recent years. How could the people of Brazil have voted in Bolsonaro’s supporters and allied party members, yet not have also elected him? This is allegedly what happened with President Trump in 2020. And what of the statistically impossible ballot drops that supported Lula to drive him up and over Bolsonaro, the same thing that happened with Biden and Trump and numerous other candidates in local offices in the United States? Are we supposed to also believe that voting machines have innocent errors that only hurt Bolsonaro and only favor Lula? Poppycock! 

In the run-off election, the shenanigans were through the room. Part of the fraud was the invalidation of a whopping 5 million votes – twice as many as the margin that Lula supposedly won by. Some reports said many of these were intentionally left blank as a form of protest. Perhaps that accounts for some of them. But five million? I don’t buy it. The reports also show that some of these were invalidated. How many? Half? A quarter? I’ve yet to see proper data other than the fact that 5 million of the ballots cast weren’t counted or were blank. 

Some may discount these votes – they were illegitimate or invalid, after all. Ok, let’s discount them. Let’s focus on the other massive evidences of fraud. First, here is a comment on the overall strangeness of the vote tabulation: 

“The source applied Benford’s Law, a highly recognized statistical formula, to analyze publicly available data provided by the Brazilian Electoral Court (TSE). All the data was culled straight from the public site which has always been the repository for these results- both historical data and new data in real time as ballots get tabulated and vote counts published. 

“The formula, which is used to demonstrate inconsistencies in data sets and raise red flags that suggest an audit should be undertaken to gauge if fraud actually did occur. This study does suggest inconsistencies in the voting tabulation in several regions across the country. According to the source team, in the second round analysis they have observed MORE illogical numerical distributions than in the first round data.” 

Many groups and parties have noticed these “illogical” vote tabulations and have called for investigations. The Liga Conservadora Brasil-Europa has released a long list of ways that the elections were suppressed. Included on the list are the following grievances

“Punishing “opinion crimes”, a crime that does not exist in Brazilian criminal law, bypassing the jurisdiction of Congress”; “Unlawful delegation of powers to fact-checking agencies – mainly left-wing ones, with bogus arguments, with the spurious aim of removing content and profiles from conservative social networks”; “Blocking and banning conservative profiles on social networks, including parliamentarians, supporters, journalists, businessmen, authorities and experts on constitutional law”; “Seizure of assets, resources, electronic devices and bank accounts from Brazilians “accused” of “anti-democratic” demonstrations without the right to due process”; and “Transforming the Supreme Court (STF) and Superior Electoral Court (TSE) into political instruments at the service of the opposition, with the aim of preventing the President of the Republic from exercising his legitimate right to govern as guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.” 

Because the fraud was so blatant, the Brazilian Establishment has lashed out against Bolsonaro’s supporters who have been protesting en masse. They’ve done the things listed above and much more. More information on that in a moment.  

Another voting issue was the corrupt electronic voting machines. The Gateway Pundit reported the findings of Argentine data expert Fernando Cerimedo. They explained

“In the 2020 machines, Jair Bolsonaro won the election 51.04% to 48.96% for Lula da Silva. In the non-auditable pre-2020 machines, Lula won 52.39% to 47.61% for Bolsonaro – even in the very same regions and cities. 

“These results were based on the publicly available data of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) from Oct. 31. 

““One hour after we presented our results on Nov. 4, the TSE site was taken down. No one knows what happened. All documents received an update at 7 pm. At 11 pm, the update went online again. When it went live again, entire sections were erased from the database.” 

““This was an attack not only on Brazil, but on democracy. Does the TSE really think we are so stupid? You cannot modify the data from the ballot boxes.” 

“Justice is rigged,” Cerimedo said.” 

Some of the same voting machine companies that stole the 2020 and 2022 U.S. elections were involved with stealing Brazil’s election – namely, Smartmatic, Oracle, and Dominion. I’ve seen conflicting data on how widely these systems were used, but one thing is now evident – Brazilians are on the receiving end of what Americans were dealt in 2020 and 2022. What’s interesting is that not only are the same thieving voting machine entities involved, but Biden’s illegitimate regime has admitted interfering. Ali Alexander of recent Stop the Steal fame wrote

“Call the agents of this World Order whatever you want—globalists, luciferians, the cabal—but They don’t want sovereign states or nationalistic leaders. This is a threat to their technocratic plans for humanity’s future. . . . 

““How Team Biden Tried to Coup-Proof Brazil’s Elections,” reads the headline. Biden personnel from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and CIA all took part in threatening the Bolsonaro administration in rare, escalatory diplomatic meetings. Then, they took their false narratives to the corporate media. 

“They did this to Trump too, using the perception that he was in control of his administration when really the bureaucrats were rogue when FBI Director Chris Wray and Christopher Krebs, the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, used federal government resources to head off any lawful election challenges. 

“To make matters worse, Biden’s top brass, including CIA Director William Burns, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, all took turns threatening Bolsonaro for months during the election. . . . 

“One of the reasons we know the 2020 election was illegitimate is that Joe Biden’s results had no down ballot success, a statistical improbability because of what we know about political science, behavior psychology, and down ballot participation rates. In fact, not one House Republican incumbent lost. House Republicans actually gained 14 seats in 2020. 

“What just happened in Brazil is “mathematically impossible,” says international politico Matthew Tyrmand. That was the same conclusion I came to November 4, 2020 here in America. I’ve been involved in over 111 federal elections. There’s never been one like the American election in 2020 or the Brazilian election in 2022. Voters don’t vote in those patterns and data has never been tabulated in these patterns. Mass uniformity in ballot returns is statistically improbable (read: impossible). 

“Yet, it only occurs in elections where nationalist leaders (like both President Donald J. Trump and President Bolsonaro) were supposedly deposed? Give me a break!” 

Eduardo Bolsonaro, the president’s son, confirmed that the theft worked the same way it did in the United States. When asked, “Did they steal Brazil like they stole America, the elections?”, Eduardo said

“Pretty much the same way. We have a lot of questions. Our party is suggesting for electoral courts to continue the investigation because you have a lot of evidence. Unfortunately, they are not doing that. That’s why they (we) take to the streets. Today we have I think 18 days in the streets protesting because they do not want a criminal again in the presidency. But also because of the way they campaigned… The evidence from the machines is only one thing. There were much other things that the electoral court did not go in the right way during the campaign.” 

To clarify, millions of Brazilian protestors have now been camped outside of government, judicial, and military buildings for over fifty days! They know the election was stolen. They know it was a fraud. They know Lula was a criminal and didn’t legitimately oust the popular Bolsonaro. 

Elon Musk has come out and said that Twitter interfered to give favor to Lula and leftist candidates. He said: 

“I’ve seen a lot of concerning tweets about the recent Brazil election. If those tweets are accurate, it’s possible that Twitter personnel gave preference to left wing candidates.” 

In 2019, Google was caught red-handed manipulating search results for Bolsonaro. Big Tech teamed up with corrupt voting machine companies and domestic traitors, such as the wicked tyrant Alexandre de Moraes of Brazil’s Supreme Court, to steal the election. 

Journalist Matthew Tyrmand has been on top of this fraud perhaps more than anyone. One Steve Banon’s War Room, after Banon said, “Do they think we’re idiots?”, Tyrmand explained

“The lower house, the House of Deputies, Bolsonaro’s party . . . not even right-wing affiliated parties, his party, went from 77 seats to 99 seats in the House of Deputies, which is a 30% gain, and that’s 20% of the total. And that’s just his party. And, in the right-wing governing coalition group, it’s that much bigger. So, they will dominate in both the lower house and the upper house. The governorships in the largest states went to Bolsonaro right-wingers. But, somehow, just like we saw in the first round . . . every ballot drop after an initial lead [went to Lula] . . . Hey, show us exactly how there is no fraud when every single ballot drop . . . [in] every state, every ballots that came in were more and more for Bolsonaro, but every ballot drop showed a narrowing of the initial lead until there was an inflection . . . every numeric drop went one way – where it shrunk Jair Bolsonaro’s lead . . . the math is, it just doesn’t make sense at all.” 

Tyrmand explained that, geographically, Bolsonaro dominated everywhere except one area where Lula has his stronghold. The press quickly said that all these late ballot drops that went for Lula were all from that area, when, in truth, the ballots were all being randomly counted at the same time – and other parts of the country hadn’t had their ballots counted yet when every ballot drop started to suddenly go towards the criminal Lula. At 67% of votes counted, when Bolsonaro was wildly ahead, suddenly all ballots went for Lula. That’s a statistical impossibility – especially considering the randomness of the counting. The only answer is fraud. 

Just after the election was stolen, Joe Hoft published an article titled, “BRAZIL – Another Victim of Election Fraud Technique Known as the “Drop and Roll”.” In it, he wrote: 

“The election in Brazil is very similar to the 2020 Presidential Election in the US.  Like President Trump in 2020, the conservative candidate Bolsonaro’s party picked up numerous lower house seats and governorships across the country.  It was a conservative wave with the exception of the Presidential race. 

“In both races, the conservatives were ahead and then the socialist candidate somehow pulled out the win. . . . 

“In Brazil, the election results were consistent for the socialists after a particular point in time.  This is what we referred to as the “roll” in the 2020 Election. 

“In 2020, President Trump was ahead all night in the key swing states by large margins, then in the middle of the night, there were huge ballot drops for Biden only.  Hundreds of thousands of Biden ballots were dropped which we referred to as the “drop”.  And then after that nearly every ballot batch recorded had the same ratio of Biden to Trump votes with Biden always receiving the same percent more than Trump (i.e. 51% to 49%). 

“In Brazil, it looks like the large ballot drops didn’t occur but the roll was in play for much of the election until the socialist suddenly pulled off the win.” 

Lula won nothing; he cheated. His communist comrades in high places, fresh on the heels of stealing the U.S. election, stole Brazil’s election. Then they stole the 2022 U.S. election, too. All they do is cheat. They can’t win fairly because their mask has fallen and increasing numbers of people see them as the tyrannical, murderous, malicious monsters they are. 

One more point. You may have noticed that Brazilian Indians have been in the news for protesting, clashing with police (after being attacked), storming the Supreme Court, and so forth. This is because, allegedly, no Indian votes went for Bolsonaro when, in fact, multiple Indian tribes heavily supported him. Chief Serere Xavante was one of the most vocal about the theft, calling for swift intervention to stop the steal. He was arrested for protesting. His tribe threatened blood in the streets if he was not released. Some of the tribal members later trespassed on the Supreme Court compound in a lukewarm attempt to free him. If he is not freed soon, the situation may escalate. 

If you believe Lula won fairly, you likely believe the propaganda that Biden won fairly, too. The truth is that the same criminals who ousted Trump are in the process of ousting the “Trump of the Tropics,” Mr. Bolsonaro. It’s in the internationalist cabal’s interests to remove strong leaders like Trump and Bolsonaro as they prepare to spring their final trap for humanity, usher in new global lockdowns, and bring about the death of civilization. 

The Brazilian people have recognized what is happening. They know the election was fraudulent. They know their voice was silenced. And they have been protesting for over fifty days. Millions of Brazilians have participated. Mass crowds of tens of thousands have gathered in hundreds of locations. Farmers blocked the roads. Rallies have been held outside of military barracks calling for the military to intervene. Other demonstrations have targeted the corrupt Lula-supporting Supreme Court which, in return, shut down dissident websites, issued arrest warrants for some of the prominent protestors and pastors, and has even threatened to steal children from parents involved in the protests. 

It says something that people are protesting to keep a sitting president in office. Usually, mass crowds protest to demand a politician leave office. Yet, where are the crowds supporting Lula? Incarcerated felons cheered loudly and banged bars in Brazil’s prisons when news of the sham election reached them. Communists trumpeted the “victory.” Red China congratulated Lula. All the wrong people are happy, meaning everyone who loves the right has cause to mourn. 

Yet, is it all over? Many Brazilians and observers say no. Since day one, Brazilians have been calling on the military to invoke Article 142 of the nation’s constitution which provides for military intervention to uphold the constitutional system. If there is election fraud, for example, the military may intervene. There are additional provisions that allow for the military to become involved in any situation where law and order are threatened. 

In the 50+ days of constant protesting by millions of Brazilians, lower-level military leaders have repeatedly assured crowds that the military is coming to their rescue. Is it wishful thinking on the part of these military leaders? Possibly. Is it a QAnon-style false-hope narrative designed to deceive and to prevent the Brazilian people from rising up in righteous fury against their oppressors? Perhaps. We will know soon enough. 

On January 1, 2023, the communist criminal Lula is scheduled to be inaugurated. If you’re paying attention, this means only two full days remain to act. It would be much more difficult for the military or Bolsonaro to intervene after January 1 when Lula is formally recognized as commander of the military and state. Some have suggested, however, that the inauguration would be the perfect moment to swoop in and arrest Lula and some of his chief aides and supporters in one decisive action.  

Rumors are flying on the ground and in the blogosphere. Many remain hopeful. Bolsonaro said he will continue fighting. He has never formally conceded defeat because he knows the election results are fraudulent. Yet, Donald Trump also never conceded defeat, and we know that he did nothing to save the American People from thralldom under Biden. 

Will Bolsonaro also turn out to be a coward? We he give up the fight and allow himself to be thrust out of the office he was voted to occupy by the people of Brazil? Will he flee? Or will he heed the chants of Brazilians: “Act Bolsonaro!” In June, Bolsonaro said: “There’s a new type of thief, the ones who want to steal our liberty. If necessary, we will go to war.” Was it a bluff or does he truly love Brazil enough to fight for her? 

Some intriguing developments have taken place that make it seem like Bolsonaro will use the military to thwart the seizure of power by Lula and his criminal cartel. Bolsonaro empowered the military to go into the cities to fight the cartels – cartels who support Lula and benefit from his corruption. These military raids ended in several executions of cartel leaders. 

Troops movements have been happening all over Brazil. Hardware, tanks, and troops have been transported publicly for weeks. Soldiers were sent to the Venezuelan border to secure it. Why? Venezuela’s Maduro has already had his ban from Brazil lifted and has been invited to participate with Lula in creating a South American communist state.  

Ruling by executive order at the current time, Bolsonaro has authorized the military to elevate its tribunals above the Supreme Court and to potentially take control of communications in the nation. He has appointed new interim heads of the armed forces, which begin taking power today. He has also brought several hundred new staff into the presidency. All of this is intriguing and makes no logical sense if Bolsonaro simply plans to walk out on January first. He has to understand that his strengthening of the military and executive will be used against his supporters unless he or one of his allies is at the helm. 

People on the ground are getting upset that military commanders seem to be dragging their heels about acting. People have begun calling them “cowards.” Yet, the military has announced that Bolsonaro is the true president. Nearly two hundred lower-level military commandres wrote an open letter to higher-ups demanding action. Yesterday, in Brasilia, when federal police attempted to make the crowds near army headquarters disperse, the military apparently sent out soldiers (one report said tanks) to encircle and protect the protestors. Bolsonaro has also said he will not disband the protest camps, which the lunatic controlled media have called “incubators of terrorism.” 

The only terrorist acts and threats have been against Bolsonaro and his patriotic supporters. The much talked about bomb threat several days ago, which the media said was nearly carried out against Lula by a Bolsonaro supporter, was actually an attempted bombing by a man who now claims the police chief ordered him to say it was against Lula. In reality, who, if anyone, was he trying to bomb? Certainly not Lula! Yet, the media spun it the opposite way, just like how they call conservatives and gun owners in the United States “domestic terrorists.” 

Speaking of gun owners, a no-firearm policy has been announced for Brasilia during the upcoming inauguration. Lula is scared of armed patriots. He wants to usher in strict gun control regulations when he comes to power – something no honest and worthy leader ever does (Hitler, for instance, reduced the Marxian gun control laws of the Weimar Republic when he came to power, reduced the legal age to purchase firearms, made the process for buying one easier, and, as a result, guns and shooting clubs proliferated). Lula has also swapped out a military protection detail for the federal police, precisely because he’s scared of the military who are predominately pro-Bolsonaro. 

Back to false flags. There was a recent incident involving three “Bolsonaro supporters.” When they were arrested, it was discovered they were not only felons recently released from prison, but anti-Bolsonaro crooks dressed in patriotic garb to appear as Bolsonaro supporters – just like Establishment agents and Marxist hoodlums falsely dressed as patriots instigated the Capitol non-riot on January 6. This is the type of false-flag event they like to pull. They’ve done it all over Europe, the United States, and elsewhere. Brazilian patriots must protect themselves from infiltration and be vigilant about who they trust so they don’t get set up. 

The media has desperately painted Bolsonaro’s tens of millions of patriotic supporters as fanatics, right-wing psychopaths, election deniers, and terrorists. Yet, these heartfelt supporters know the truth. Now, it remains to be seen whether the military and Bolsonaro – both self-proclaimed defenders of the nation – will act on the truth or whether they will allow Brazil to be consumed by jackals. 

I again quote from Bolsonaro who once promised: 

“We are the majority. We are the real Brazil. Together, we will build a new nation. . .These red [leftist] criminals will be banished from our homeland. Either they go overseas, or they go to jail. It will be a cleanup the likes of which has never been seen in Brazilian history” (Jair Bolsonaro, 21 October 2018). 

Now, the reverse is about to happen. Bolsonaro is seemingly preparing to go into exile or be arrested by the incoming regime which has already demanded his arrest. Rumors swirled on the 28th that Bolsonaro was fleeing to Florida to take refuge with Donald Trump. His presidential plane indeed flew to Florida. However, Bolsonaro called the news “fake.” He is in Brasilia at the current time. It appears possibly true, though, that his family was flown to Florida to escape the persecution that’s coming or to be out of the way if a military confrontation takes place at the eleventh hour. 

“S.O.S. Armed Forces”

Notice that I have not called military intervention, if it ever happens, a “coup.” That’s the talking point pushed by the Marxist media. It’s the talking point repeated by historically illiterate pundits like Alex Jones say in relationship to the 1933 Reichstag fire in Germany which the communists at the time called a “false flag” and which unwitting dopes repeat today. 

Today, the same international communists who painted anti-communist, Christian, pro-family Hitler as the “enemy” are painting anti-socialist Trump and anti-communist Bolsonaro as the “enemy.” In a way, though, if Bolsonaro doesn’t act, he will join the ranks of those who can’t be trusted with power, just like Trump forever lost our confidence when he refused to fight to reverse the 2020 election theft. Just as Trump will never be allowed to retake the presidency, Bolsonaro won’t ever be allowed to return to power in Brazil if he doesn’t make his stand now

On that note, today, as I was finishing this article, President Bolsonaro made a rare speech. In it, he apparently quashed the idea of military intervention. I have yet to find a full transcript, but the excerpts I’ve seen from multiple sources are depressing. One statement reads: 

“Certain measures have to have support from other parties, support from parliament, support from some of the Supreme, from other institutions. Some people think it’s just take the Santa and solve it. It’s not like that. It is not easy. I have always done my part.” 

He also asked his supporters who are camped outside of military and government buildings to avoid violence, which is a despicable thing to demand of people who have had their voice silence and who are about to lose their Freedom entirely. Yet, despite this, Bolsonaro said: “Brazil will not end on the 1st.” That’s a naive thing to say. The country will forfeit any semblance of Liberty it has regained under Bolsonaro if Lula is allowed to again seize power over a population that doesn’t want him and which didn’t vote for him. 

Lula is preparing to usher Brazil into the league of communist nations. He already tethered his nation to Russia and China via BRICS, but he intends to strengthen that alliance at a time when those states are hostile to the United States. Brazil would thus pose a severe threat to the United States and the Western Hemisphere. Brazil will soon become like Venezuela or Cuba if Lula gets his way, albeit more influential than either of them. 

After briefly covering Bolsonaro’s speech from earlier today, Brazilian writer Fernando de Castro summed it up thus: “And with his farewell statement, Brazil joins the Marxist ranks in South America.” What more can we add? 

Perhaps one more quick point. Regardless of whether Bolsonaro has the spine to act, there is perhaps enough anger on the streets that the Brazilian people might act. This morning, Richard Abelson wrote

““I think Alexandre de Moraes can arrest Jair Bolsonaro. He’s crazy,” said son and Senator Flávio Bolsonaro. “He is not respecting the law or the Constitution. The Senate and the other Justices of the Supreme Court are doing nothing. So he can do anything, anything can happen!” 

““All of Brazil is now converging on the capital of Brasilia for a major protest. There are buses coming and the Federal Police is stopping them on the road,” says our observer. “If the Army does not intervene, the people will rise up and there will be Civil War.” 

“Federal Police controlled by the Pro-Lula Supreme Court have issued arrest warrants for 32 Bolsonaro supporters for the crime of alleged “vandalism” and “undemocratic acts” in what they are calling Operation Nero. Roman Emperor Nero is famous for letting his country burn down. Federal Police also attempted to clear the protest camp outside the Army HQ in Brasilia but were stopped by soldiers, since the camp is on military ground. 

“A man arrested for planning a bomb attack in Brasilia said Police Chief forced him to say he was against Lula. A video circulating on the Internet “goes against what has been said by the press,” reports Brazil in English. “Mr George Washington accused of planning a bomb attack on a tank car to cause an explosion at the airport of Brasilia said that he was forced by the Police Chief to say that he was against President- elect Lula da Silva” 

“Bolsonaro is making preparations for a major operation, according to our observer, including preparations for counter cyber war, and giving the armed forces control of communication.  The government authorized millions to be invested in cloud capacity, to buy drones and ammunition. 

“There are many military people being allocated to strategic positions. Lots of weapons are being purchased and agreements being made with companies to provide logistics support for the armed forces. 

“Special ambassadors being assigned to speak and represent Brazil overseas with a clear mission to speak positively for Brazil and avert claims of a “Bolsonaro coup”. Recently a cabal of deep-state “diplomats” plotting against Bolsonaro was uncovered in the Foreign Ministry, who had been sabotaging Brazil’ foreign policy. 

“If Article 142 of the Brazilian Constitution is invoked, empowering the military to restore order, the military will then have access to the source code of the sketchy election machines, so they will find out who the real winner was, and call for new elections, goes the hope. 

“In this case, our observer expects “a civil war scenario” as the narco militias and leftist governments of South America (Sao Paulo Forum) “desperately want to get hold of Brazil.” This is also the reason why the military has been deployed to the Venezuelan border.” 

As covered briefly above, there has been a host of actions that portend military intervention and Bolsonaro staying in command. However, be that as it may, enough average Brazilian citizens are infuriated that war and revolt may happen regardless. And let it happen! I have been calling for rebellion against tyrants in the United States as well. Unless and until the fighting spirit of 1776 grips people in all lands, tyrants will continue oppressing and Satan will continue to rule with blood and horror on this earth. 

As the demonic forces of world destruction tighten their grip, though, good people everywhere are beginning to fight back. The slaves are rising. This is a good thing, but it will mean bloodshed. Liberty, once lost, can only be regained through bloodshed. History confirms this and Brazilians will learn it the hard way unless their leaders act now before Lula seizes illicit power. 

To close, I repeat that Brazil will be turned into a Marxist utopia patterned after Red China or Venezuela if Lula is permitted to conquer the presidency. He and his cronies stole the election. Brazilians know it was stolen. Their only hope is for Bolsonaro and the military to intervene to stop the steal or for them to rise in bloody revolution. They have a God-given right to rise in rebellion to tyrants. If the military is too cowardly to act, God help the people of Brazil do the right thing! I pray for those in Brazil, especially for the patriots who are being disenfranchised by the Marxist jackals in power who have raped their trust, stolen their voice, and are devouring their Liberty. 

When Bolsonaro campaigned for the presidency the first time around, he released a picture of a communist hand with a dagger slashing down to stab Brazil. It showed another hand, in the colors of the Brazilian flag, rising to stop it. This is a fitting analogy. If Bolsonaro is thrust out of office by fraud, and if the military won’t act to defend its people, then the Bolshevik dagger will finally be plunged into Brazil’s heart. If that happens, Brazil won’t recover. Choose your next move wisely, Brazil.  

Zack Strong, 
December 30, 2022

The Inevitability of Nuclear War

“Not only is it an excellent chance, in my view it’s inevitable, it’s immutable, it will happen, it’s decreed, there’s nothing going to stop it. And World War III will come. And it will be started, in my opinion, by the communists.” – Zack Strong, “Fake Fall of the Soviet Union,” Liberty Wolf podcast, June 5, 2021. 

Humanity is in denial about the inevitability of nuclear war. The mad scientists in the United States, Russia, China, and other nations that have developed nukes and similarly hideous bio-chemical weapons, haven’t created and stockpiled them with the intention of never using them. You stockpile weapons and keep them in your inventory only if you plan to use them. Russia, China, and the United States, and several other nations such as Israel, India, and Pakistan, have codified plans to use these demonic weapons and are currently only waiting for the right pretext to use them. 

There are really only a few semi-valid reasons why people think there might not be nuclear war. First, they have been hoodwinked into believing the Soviet propaganda myth of “nuclear winter” and “mutually assured destruction.” Second, they misjudge Russia’s and China’s motivations. Or, third, they believe that one “globalist” conspiracy controls both sides and therefore is only play acting. 

In a 1985 Defense Nuclear Agency report, “Soviet Exploitation of the “Nuclear Winter” Hypothesis,” Dr. Leon Goure wrote: 

“During 1983, Soviet scientific spokesmen publicly embraced the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis and published several models for the climatic consequences of a nuclear war which they presented in various international forums in the West. 

“Soviet science spokesmen and media have claimed, and this was initially widely accepted in the West, that Soviet scientists had independently confirmed the probability of a “Nuclear Winter” phenomenon as a consequence of a nuclear war. An examination of open Soviet publications specifically discussing this prediction, however, show this claim to be unfounded. In their writings on the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis, Soviet scientists have neither used independent scenarios nor provided independent values of the essential parameters characterizing soot, on which the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis principally depends. Instead, Soviet spokesmen have uncritically used in toto the “worst-case” scenarios and estimates of the Crutzen-Birks and TTAPS studies and merely adapted them to mathematical simulations of multi-dimensional models of global atmospheric circulation after the nuclear war. Even the model itself in the case of the widely publicized study by V. Aleksandrov and G. Stenchikov is based on a borrowed obsolete Western model. . . . 

“An examination of Soviet public discussions of the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis indicates that the Soviets have seen it primarily not as a scientific but rather as a political and propaganda opportunity and have sought to exploit it accordingly. The Soviet objective has been to reinforce the “anti-nuclear” movements in the West, to influence the opinion of the Western public and especially of its scientific community, to enhance opposition to U.S. defense and foreign policies, and also to lend support to Soviet arms control proposals. For this purpose, the Soviets saw no utility in becoming involved in scientific debates in the West over the validity of the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis or to provide independent scenarios or data which might have been at variance with its assumptions and projections. From the Soviet viewpoint, it was sufficient to adopt this hypothesis and to merely give the impression of its “independent” confirmation by Soviet scientists. 

“. . . there are no signs that Soviet official public support for the “Nuclear Winter” hypothesis has had any influence on Soviet strategic weapons programs, the direction of Soviet scientific support for them, or the continuing improvement of civil defense.” 

What started as a flawed article in a publication of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences became a Soviet talking point and, finally, a global myth. “Nuclear winter” is an absurdity with only a shadow of truth. It was whispered into Western ears until the Western mind finally bought the lie and convinced itself that nuclear war was unthinkable. 

Here’s a factoid. In total, there have been nearly 2,500 admitted nuclear tests in the world, with some 520 of these being above-ground atmospheric explosions. The true, unclassified number is greater. However, for sake of argument, let’s take 500 as our number. Are you aware that humans have already exploded 500 nuclear weapons above ground? Yet, there is no nuclear winter. The world continues to spin. The sun continues to shine. Crops continue to grow. These tests have gone practically unnoticed. Most of them ended decades ago, yet they had no huge, lasting, or cataclysmic impact on the ecology of the earth or its inhabitants. 

Why, then, should anyone believe that a nuclear war involving hundreds, perhaps thousands, of weapons would be devastating in and of itself? The biggest difference would be the locations of the explosions. In a war, major cities and ports and, naturally, military installations, would be hit directly, causing great loss of life. However, the fearful blasts, and the resulting fallout, would not, indeed could not, kill off all of life on planet earth. It’s essentially impossible. It could be a contributing factor that, in conjunction with other elements, could lead to more devastating destructions, but it will not be the cause of itself. 

In August of 2022, Business Insider put out a report about potential nuclear war. A lot of the report was scaremongering, stating things like a nuclear war would be a “civilization-ending event.” However, they did provide some useful information. They talked about EMPs and described some of the damage that could be expected from large nuclear weapons: 

“When a nuclear bomb strikes, it sets off a flash of light, a giant orange fireball, and building-toppling shockwaves. People at the center of the explosion (within half a mile for a 300-kiloton bomb) could be killed right away, while others in the vicinity could suffer third-degree burns. A 1,000-kiloton nuclear blast might produce third-degree burns up to 5 miles away, second-degree burns up to 6 miles away, and first-degree burns up to 7 miles away, according to one estimate from AsapScience. People up to 53 miles away could also experience temporary blindness. . . . 

“Nuclear explosions also produce clouds of dust and sandlike radioactive particles that disperse into the atmosphere — what’s referred to as nuclear fallout. Exposure to this fallout can result in radiation poisoning, which could damage the body’s cells and prove fatal. 

“Fallout can block sunlight, causing temperatures to drop dramatically and shortening the growing season for essential crops. Drozdenko said crop production could be drastically altered for decades, which would result in famine in some places.” 

The takeaway from the article is that while the destruction would be devastating for localized areas, people would still survive. It might not be fun being a survivor, depending on where you are, but most of us will likely survive the coming nuclear strikes that will herald full-blown World War III. What comes after nuclear war in terms of societal collapse, mass starvation, and total mobocracy is far more terrifying than nuclear war itself. 

A more credible source is ki4u.com. They have a report titled “The Good News About Nuclear Destruction!” In it, they note: 

“What possible ‘good news’ could there ever be about nuclear destruction coming to America, whether it is Dirty Bombs, Terrorist Nukes, or ICBM’s from afar? 

“In a word, they are all survivable for the vast majority of American families, IF they know what to do beforehand and have made even the most modest of preparations. . . . 

“Most people think that if nukes go off then everybody is going to die, or it’ll be so bad they’ll wish they had. That’s why you hear such absurd comments as; “If it happens, I hope I’m at ground zero and go quickly.” 

“This defeatist attitude was born as the disarmament movement ridiculed any competing alternatives to their ban-the-bomb agenda, like Civil Defense. The activists wanted all to think there was no surviving any nukes, disarmament was your only hope. The sound Civil Defense strategies of the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s have been derided as being largely ineffective, or at worst a cruel joke. Since the supposed end of the Cold War in the 80’s, most Americans saw neither a need to prepare, nor believed that preparation would do any good. Today, with growing prospects of nuclear terrorism, and nuclear saber rattling from rogue nations, we see emerging among the public either paralyzing fear or irrational denial. People can’t even begin to envision effective preparations for ever surviving a nuclear attack. They think it totally futile, bordering on lunacy, to even try. 

“Ironically, the disarmament activists legacy, regardless their noble intent, has rendered millions of Americans even more vulnerable to perishing from nukes in the future. 

“The biggest surprise for most Americans, from the first flash of a nuke being unleashed, is that they will still be here, though ill-equipped to survive for long, if they don’t know what to do, and not do, beforehand from that very first second of the initial flash onward. . . .  

“. . . Clearly, the good news is most people would survive that initial blast.” 

The report detailed studies and historical examples from Hiroshima and Nagasaki to show that most of us will survive the initial explosions in a nuclear war. They also praised the “duck and cover” strategy that makes ignorant people chuckle today. Modern man, not knowing anything about how nuclear weapons work and obviously havening never read any of the firsthand accounts from a-bomb survivors in Japan, thinks it futile to duck and cover behind objects. “How can a small fence or a wall protect you from a nuclear blast?!” they cry. The reality is, however, that they absolutely can protect you. 

In the above report, we find this additional testimony and information: 

“Robert Trumbull – the New York Times Pacific and Asia war correspondent, 1941-79 who had been in Iwo Jima – documented more double-bombing survivors in his 1957 book Nine Who Survived Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Personal Experiences of Nine Men who Lived Through Both Atomic Bombings. Two of their experiences and their ages on 9 August 1945: 

“Tsutomu Yamaguchi, 29, Mitsubishi ship designer who died in 2010, aged 93 (Trumbull pp. 28 and 109): “‘Suddenly there was a flash like the lighting of a huge magnesium flare,’ Yamaguchi recalls. The young ship designer was so well drilled in air-raid precaution techniques that he reacted automatically. He flung his hands to his head, covering his eyes with his fingers and stopping his ears with his two thumbs. Simultaneously he dropped to the ground, face down. . . . ‘As I prostrated myself, there came a terrific explosion’ . . . [The left side of his face and arm facing the fireball were burned, and he returned to Nagasaki, experiencing the second nuclear explosion on the sixth-floor of the headquarters office of Mitsubishi.] Spelling out the danger of flying glass, he urged them to keep windows open during an air-raid alert, and at the instant of the flash to seize at once upon any shelter available . . . the second A-bomb confirmed young Yamaguchi’s words, exploding in a huge ball of fire about a mile away. Yamaguchi’s lecture [just an hour earlier!]. . . was not lost upon his colleagues. With the young designer’s words still fresh in their minds, they leaped for the cover of desks and tables. ‘As a result,’ said Yamaguchi, ‘my section staff suffered the least in that building. In other sections there was a heavy toll of serious injuries from flying glass’.” 

“Masao Komatsu, 40, was hit by falling beam in a Hiroshima warehouse and was on board a train in Nagasaki when the bomb fell (Trumbull, p 101): “. . . the interior of the coach was bathed in a stark, white light. Komatsu immediately dived for the floor. ‘Get down!’ he screamed at the other passengers. Some recovered sufficiently from the daze of the blinding light to react promptly to his warning. Seconds later came the deafening crack of the blast, and a shock wave that splintered all the windows on both sides of the train. The passengers who had not dived under the seats were slashed mercilessly from waist to head by glass flying at bullet speed.” 

“While terrorist nukes would likely be smaller than the Hiroshima (15 KT) bomb, in a modern super power conflict today, the nukes would be larger, most in the 100 KT to 500 KT range. The unsurvivable ‘ground zero’ lethal zone of a 500 KT nuke airburst, would extend out to about 2.2 miles. The blast wave would arrive at that 2.2 mile marker about eight seconds after the flash and then continue on causing death or injury from there out to about 9 miles. Putting at grave risk then an additional over 15 times more souls than were already lost within that unsurvivable 2.2 mile ground zero radius. That’s IF they don’t know to ‘Duck & Cover’ in those 8 to 20+ seconds after the flash and before the blast wave arrived. In other words, with ‘Duck & Cover’ taught to and employed by all, there could be over 15 times fewer casualties from that blast wave!” 

Please fix in your mind the fact that nuclear blasts are highly survivable. As long as you are not in the immediate blast radius and take reasonable precautions against fallout, you will survive. This is why I have preached relocation in every article on preparedness I have ever written over the course of the past decade. It is crucial to remove yourself from potential blast zones. Where are these potential blast zones? Not every city is a target, but hundreds are. 

For the most part, the targets of a nuclear war will be military installations and bases and other strategic infrastructure such as ports. Washington, D.C. is an obvious target, as is the various command centers of our military operations, including Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado Springs. Our nuclear fields in Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming are particular targets for enemy nukes. It seems unrealistic to assume that major economic and power centers like New York City will be spared. 

But what if you live in rural America, such as in Idaho, Missouri, South Dakota, or Utah? Likely, your locations aren’t targets. Your primary concerns will be fallout and, even worse, the flood of refugees and starved and stunned people that will flee the cities in desperate panic in search of safety and supplies. 

After the initial nuclear die-off, rampant pillaging by starving people, and culling of the human herd, a longer-term threat would be starvation and famine. This is why it pays to have food storage set aside. I recommend having at least a one-year supply, including all the water filtration devices necessary to sustain you. You also need a power generator or other supplies for cooking food and keeping yourself warm. You need tools, warm clothing and blankets, medical equipment, and so many other little things you take for granted. 

Having and storing a year’s supply of food and other essentials is not impractical and it is not too expensive – especially if you prioritize correctly and properly value the lives of your loved ones. However, unless you have hundreds or thousands of dollars to drop on supplies today, you must start immediately and work methodically to build up your reserves and learn how to use them. You still have time, though time is dwindling. 

You should also be prepared to grow, hunt, and forage food. A 1986 book by Fredric Solomon, The Medical Implications of Nuclear War, gives this description of food procurement and farming after a nuclear war: 

“World food reserves, as measured by total cereal stores at any given time, are frighteningly small should production fail . . . In the United States food stores would feed the population for about a year. Portions of the stores, however, would be destroyed by blast or fire or would be contaminated by radioactivity. Crops in the field would be damaged to an unpredictable extent. 

“More important, the means to transport the food from sites of harvest or storage to the consumers would no longer exist. Transportation centers would be prime targets of an aggressor intent on destroying the industrial competence of an opponent to sustain a war. Roads, bridges, and rail and port facilities would be likely targets. Foods that appear in our markets are not grown locally. In Massachusetts, for example, more than threequarters of the food arrives from out of state by truck or rail, and supplies on hand would last for only a few days. In a nuclear attack most of these supplies in urban areas would be destroyed. In the United States and other developed countries, food no longer is carried by farmers to nearby markets. The northeastern United States is particularly vulnerable to a breakdown in transportation of foods since some 80 percent of its food is imported, but other sections of the country would fare only little better . . . With key railway links and highways destroyed and gasoline and diesel fuels unavailable, whatever crops survived could not be moved to places where they would be needed. 

“Food is supplied today in the United States and developed countries by a complex network of enterprises that involves not only farming, animal husbandry, and fishing but also farm machinery, pesticides, fertilizers, petroleum products, and commercial seeds. This network utilizes sophisticated techniques and technology to handle the food that is produced. These include grain elevators, slaughterhouses, cold-storage plants, flour mills, canning factories, and other packaging plants. It also includes the transportation, the storage, and the marketing and distribution of foods through both wholesale and retail outlets. A breakdown in this vast agribusiness would be an inevitable consequence of a nuclear war. Without the means to harvest, process, and distribute those crops that survived, there would be much spoilage. 

“So much of the social and economic structure of society as we know it would be destroyed that relationships that we take for granted would disappear. Money would have little or no value. Food and other necessities would be obtained, when available, by barter. More likely, as people became desperate with hunger, survival instincts would take over, and armed individuals or marauding bands would raid and pilfer whatever supplies and stores still existed. Those fortunate individuals who had stores would hoard their resources and soon become the victims of the crazed behavior of starving and desperate survivors who would ransack warehouses and attack individual homes. Law enforcement would not exist, and many would be killed in the fighting between those trying forcefully to obtain possession of food stores and those trying to protect their own homes, families, and food supplies. 

“The early death of millions of humans and animals following a major nuclear war would not sufficiently compensate for the reduced available food supplies. Stocks of fuels, fertilizers, agricultural chemicals, and seed would soon be exhausted. Not only functioning tractors but also beasts of burden would be in short supply, and food production would become very labor intensive—a throwback to the primitive farming methods of the Middle Ages or earlier. The resistance of insects to radiation and the lack of pesticides would further reduce the yield of crops. Fields downwind from targeted sites are likely to be made unusable by radioactive fallout for weeks to years. . . . 

“There would likely be a deterioration of the quality of the soil following a nuclear war. The death of plant and forest coverage because of fire, radiation, the lack of fertilizers, and the probable primitive slash-and-bum agricultural practices of survivors would leave the soil vulnerable to erosion by wind and rain. Desertification and coarse grasses and shrubs would render agriculture and animal husbandry less productive. 

“Water supplies may be seriously reduced after a nuclear war. Dams and large irrigation projects may well be targets, especially in a counter-value attack. . . . 

“Not only would food be scarce but it would likely be unsanitary as well. The destruction of sanitation, refrigeration, and food-processing methods, especially in the remaining urban areas or population centers, would result in the contamination of food by bacteria, particularly by enteric pathogens. Spoiled meat, carrion of domestic animals and even of human corpses, are likely to be eaten by starving persons, as has happened in major famines in the past. Pathogens to which civilized man has lost resistance would be acquired from foods and water contaminated by excreta and flies, other insects, and rodents, which would likely proliferate in the aftermath of nuclear war. 

“But the hunger and starvation would not be limited to the combatant countries alone, or even to just the Northern Hemisphere. It would truly be a global occurrence” (Fredric Solomon, The Medical Implications of Nuclear War, 284-286). 

I honestly worry very little about a nuclear war. I am relatively certain I will survive it, like most of us will. However, the aftermath is a different story. We should be more worried about what to do after a nuclear exchange instead of fretting about whether we will survive. Depending on your location and the specific fallout in the area, you will likely be ok to move out of your initial shelter – which you should immediately get in once a nuclear exchange begins and fallout is at its peak danger – within approximately two weeks to a month. 

Soil should be farmable again after approximately a year, depending on radiation levels in the area. Certain plants, such as sunflowers, can help draw radiation out of the soil to speed up the recovery process. Since it is difficult to precisely gauge the level of soil radiation and how affected food really is, it is best to simply wait. Time is an ally; that is, it is an ally if you have prepared sufficiently in advance to survive. 

Among other preparations, you should have potassium iodide (KI) tablets on hand. ThyroSafe and Iosat are the two popular and authorized brands. I have some of each in my supplies. Pectin, commonly found in apples, is another wise addition to your survival kit. It can help protect against radiation and even reverse some of its effects. Apple juice, which contains pectin, was given to people exposed to Chernobyl’s deadly radiation. 

Those are only a few suggestions that can get you started in your preparations. The point of this article, however, is to establish that nuclear war is not merely realistic, but inevitable. To that end, I return to the politics of the subject. Since we know that nuclear war is highly survivable, especially if you have taken five minutes to prepare, then how does that impact Russia’s thoughts on launching nuclear war? 

Russia has been prepping for a nuclear conflict for seventy years. Besides having an active civil defense program, Russia has invested heavily in underground bunkers. Mount Yamantau and Kosvinsky Kamen in the Ural Mountains house Russia’s underground, nuclear-proof headquarters. Even though the Soviets began building them in the 1970s, we know relatively little about them. These bunkers – more like underground cities – are extensive, sophisticated, and contain massive survival supplies anticipating prolonged periods of use in a future day. 

A November 2020 article said of these two sites: 

“Putin has announced that Russia has made serious progress in the implementation of its strategic forces control systems. The reports in Russian media suggest that the launcher is inaccessible to the enemy, and is capable of withstanding a nuclear strike. It has also been suggested that the control center itself is completely outside Russia. . . . 

“Putin sought assurance over three matters – first, the need for constant exercises and other events to make sure command and control systems are working as intended and that the people trusted with running them know how to properly operate them. 

“Secondly, modernize the country’s nuclear command and control architecture and a need to ensure the survivability of the country’s nuclear command and control infrastructure. “We are aware that a lot depends on the survivability of these systems and their ability to continue operating in a combat environment,” he said.  

““They have told me that the creation of an absolutely secure facility for controlling strategic nuclear forces, among others is nearing completion, and that it will have a very high safety margin,” Putin reportedly said at the meeting. 

“Russia has two sites that would match this general description, one at Kosvinsky Kamen in the Northern Ural Mountains and another under Mount Yamantau in the Southern Ural Mountains. His remarks about the need to protect the overall command and control infrastructure against any threats, including a nuclear attack, point to a site that is a deeply buried underground bunker of some kind” . . . . 

““Kosvinsky is regarded by US targeteers as the crown jewel of the Russian wartime nuclear command system because it can communicate through the granite mountain to far-flung Russian strategic forces using very-low-frequency (VLF) radio signals that can burn through a nuclear war environment,” [Bruce] Blair wrote.” 

Other such Russian preparations for nuclear war could be noted. Before discussing Russian nuclear launch policies further, a word about Red China. China has not been derelict in prepping for war. China has constructed a system of some 3,100 miles of underground bunkers dubbed by Western researchers the “Underground Great Wall.” This cavernous system contains missile production facilities, missile launch equipment, and survival supplies. Dr. Hui Zhang has written

“China’s underground Great Wall is not just for weapons storage. It is operated mainly as a missile launch base (zhendi). I like to call it “subterranean ballistic missile” (an underground-based version of a nuclear missile submarine, or SSBN). Just as a submarine deterrent offers survivability, so too does a subterranean force; the philosophy underpinning the two are the same. 

“’China’s underground Great Wall is converting its land-based ballistic missiles into “tunnel-launched ballistic missiles” (I prefer the new acronym “TLBM”). Thus, China has moved its land-base missiles to underground-basing to ensure a limited and reliable second-strike nuclear force after absorbing a first nuclear strike. On this basis, it should be not difficult to understand why China builds it with so many tunnels. . . . 

“. . . These tunnels have been built hundreds of meters underground, in deep mountain  areas, and are difficult to detect from space. They can withstand nuclear and conventional  attacks. The missiles, personnel and related equipment can be transported by rails and trucks within the network of tunnels  to various locations. All the activities for launch preparation can be done in the tunnels without detection. Some of the tunnels could also be for logistical support or command and control facilities. . . . 

“The fact that Beijing is willing to reveal the existence of the underground Great Wall shows Beijing wants potential adversaries to know it has real and reliable retaliatory counterattack capability and thus discourage thoughts of first strike. From a Chinese perspective, China’s underground Great Wall further consolidates the mutual deterrence between China and the US, and thereby enhances strategic stability.” 

While giving a good overview of the Underground Great Wall, Hui Zhang nevertheless dismisses China’s threat. He believes that China has essentially stopped making nuclear weapons and has such a low supply that they would never consider a first strike, but would only retaliate if attacked. Said he: “China has a small arsenal that is deeply de-alerted and has pledged no-first-use.” I believe this is utterly false and goes against reason, and the evidence, to assume that China hasn’t continued making nuclear weapons or advancing their capabilities. 

Western analysts have consistently downplayed China’s threat and vastly underestimated the size of their nuclear arsenal. This past November, however, the Pentagon announced that it believes China will have 1,500 nuclear weapons by 2035 – a much higher number than presently acknowledged. 

At any rate, Dr. Zhang showed that China is also preparing for nuclear war and believes it is absolutely survivable, thus increasing the likelihood they would feel secure pulling the trigger. They began working on this tunnel system in 1995 and continue expanding it. They have known for a long time that war is coming and are playing the long game. 

Now, back to Russia, which I believe will be the point man of the future nuclear surprise strike on the West. What does Russia’s formal military doctrine state about using nuclear weapons? I quote a summation of Russia’s policies written by Cynthia Roberts. In 2020, just after Russia published an updated stance on the use of nuclear weapons, she explained

“Analysts should read Principles of State Policy extremely carefully and with a Russian lens. Importantly, Russia experts should appreciate that Moscow is animated by a persistent fear that Washington seeks to neutralize Russia’s strategic deterrent. As a result, the military is fixated on preemption to prevent a disabling first strike, even as the political leadership has traditionally resisted pre-delegating nuclear authority. The document also shows that Russian nuclear doctrine has focused more on ensuring deterrence and less on nuclear coercion for aggressive aims. . . . 

“The latest version of official Russian military doctrine, which was released in 2014, states that: 

““The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened” . . . . 

“What is new and most striking in Russian nuclear strategy is how Principles handles the possible employment of nuclear weapons if deterrence fails. Section III on “Conditions under which the Russian Federation Transitions to the Use of Nuclear Weapons,” especially Clause 19, specifies four conditions that could lead to nuclear use. The first such condition is the possession of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles to attack Russian territory and/or its allies. This situation opens the possibility for Moscow to launch Russian nuclear weapons on warning of a nuclear attack instead of delaying retaliatory action until confirmation that targets are destroyed or alternatively launching while an attack is underway. Developed during the Cold War, the “launch on warning” option was considered by both sides as a means to strengthen nuclear deterrence by helping to guarantee retaliation. But, if adopted, launch on warning is also associated with the significant risk of false warning alerts and an accidental launch. The second condition is the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction by an adversary against Russian territory and/or its allies. Next, the third condition has to do with actions taken against Russian critical government or military installations by an adversary that would have the effect of disrupting Russia’s capacity for nuclear retaliation. Finally, the fourth condition in which Russia could employ nuclear weapons is in the event of aggression against Russia using conventional weapons that threaten the very existence of the state. . . . 

“From the standpoint of national policy, Principles, which was issued by presidential decree (ukaz), is a reminder that Putin is the most actively engaged Russian leader on nuclear weapons since Nikita Khrushchev. Putin is far more successful than Khrushchev in rebuilding Russian military and nuclear capabilities without breaking the economy or losing power while also perhaps the most nuclear attentive current leader of any contemporary nuclear weapons state. Principles reminds us that, like the American president, the Russian president has the responsibility to decide the use of nuclear weapons. Putin is unusually blunt in signaling Russia’s willingness to exploit its nuclear strength and declares the active deterrent relevance of nuclear weapons such as in the event that the United States or NATO attempt to use force to reverse Russia’s annexation of Crimea. This coercive form of nuclear signaling reflects the Russian emphasis on deterring major powers by means of intimidation and the punishing use of Russian nuclear forces.” 

While some believe that Russia, ostensibly like their Chinese comrades, seeks to deescalate tensions, that they are deemphasizing nuclear aggression, and that they plan on only retaliating to a U.S. first strike instead of preemptively launching their own attack, the official military doctrine tells a different story. These notions are easy to dismiss for one profoundly important reason; namely, that the Russians and Chinese are habitual liars

They rule by deception. They have violated every treaty they have ever signed with us. These are communists who openly believe that lying in service of the party or the cause is a virtue. At the height of the Cold War, Marion G. Romney hit the nail on the head when he said: 

“Liberty loving people can no more expect to secure cooperation from communism in the establishment of peace than Christ could secure such cooperation from Satan. Communism being what it is, will never voluntarily yield in its evil purposes. Every time it negotiates, it advances its own cause or it does not deal” (President Marion G. Romney, BYU devotional, March 1, 1955). 

We are talking about people who murdered over a hundred million of their own citizens and countries which still hold their people in suffocating bondage. In China’s case, this is quite literal = the entire nation is an open-air GULAG. Freedom is likewise sparse in the Russian Federation and amounts to mere window dressing for Marxist tyranny. I experienced this gnawing lack of Liberty – religious and political – firsthand when I lived in Russia. 

Think of it. Putin – the man who decides whether to launch Russia’s unsurpassed arsenal of nukes – jails his political opposition, rigs his elections, assassinates defectors who expose his litany of crimes, represses religious minorities, and is a career KGB officer handpicked and put in power by Soviet oligarchs. He is an adulterer, a fake Christian, and a dangerous anti-Christ who has formed an alliance with the fraudulent, KGB-controlled Russian Orthodox Church to whip up a sense of Russian Messianism and nationalism in what he calls a “holy war.” He is a secret billionaire who walks with the elites and rubs shoulders with the worst criminals on earth. He has carried out false-flag bombings to wage wars of aggression. The gangsters in Washington and Israel aren’t the only ones who carry out false-flag attacks, a la 9/11. Russia are the perfectors of false flags! 

Putin routinely orchestrates false flags events. That is how he got his nation into war with Chechnya and propelled himself to power. Read Russian intelligence defector Alexander Litvinenko’s book Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror that got him assassinated by Putin’s regime. This is how Putin got into Georgia in 2008 when Russian soldiers without markings created crises to which Putin “responded” with an invasion too quick to have been reactionary. 

It’s also the tired pretext Putin used in both 2014 and 2022 to go into Ukraine and annex Crimea to supposedly save Russian citizens from “Nazis” and “genocide” and “NATO expansion.” Lies, staged coups, and false flags are Russia’s M.O. every bit as much, if not more, than the U.S.’s M.O. Anyone who can’t admit that Russia engages in these deceptions, and engaged in them to start their imperialist war in Ukraine, is either woefully ignorant or a contemptible liar. 

More importantly, and something which I am one of the few writers in the world to cover in any detail on a regular basis, the alleged “collapse” of the Soviet Union was itself a false-flag event! The “fall” of communism was a complete and total fraud. It was pre-planned and carefully-staged political theater. It was a ruse. 

The “fall” was admitted by Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev to be an infusion of more socialism and more Leninism into the world. He said Russia was resurrecting pure Leninism instead of continuing the Stalinist version of Leninism. He gloated about this in his book Perestroika. The controlled Western media, of course, didn’t expose the devious deception, but ran with it to help the global cabal lull us to sleep as the communist world revolution entered its endgame. 

In each of my books A Century of Red and Red Gadiantons, I have a chapter detailing the evidence for the fake “fall” of the USSR. In my podcast episode “Fake Fall of the Soviet Union,” I spent forty-two minutes going over the evidence. In my Red Alert newsletter, which is now on hiatus, I hammered home the point in nearly every edition for over a year. I discussed it briefly in “Five Facts About the Communist Conspiracy You Should Know” and “Russia Lies.” I have talked about it endlessly on social media since I first created an account on Facebook in 2008, including on my page “Red Plague – the Communist Threat to Mankind” and on my Gab account

I have made people’s eyes glaze over telling them about the Russian deception since 1999 when the reality of this phony “collapse” was confirmed powerfully to my soul by the Holy Spirit in a special experience. You might call it a mission, or a spiritual calling, for me to wake up as many people to the reality of the fraudulent “death” of communism. It is one of the passions that keeps me going. 

If people simply understood that the Evil Empire – the communist conspiracy – faked its own demise in order to lull the West to sleep in preparation for its final death blow, many things could change and we could mount a legitimate defense. We would see the world clearly and understand Putin’s chess moves. 

As it is, many people (especially naïve conservatives) think that Russia is reformed, that Putin is a nationalist who isn’t trying to restore the Soviet empire but only wants to protect his people against NATO aggression, and that Russia is a “bastion of traditionalism” and the only nation that can protect Christianity from Satan’s henchmen in the West. This is a lie from top to bottom. 

I earlier noted Gorbachev’s own testimony that perestroika was a deception, just like détente was a fraud and all those truces Mao Tse-tung made with the Chinese government were lies. Here is one small piece of his gloating confession: 

“The essence of perestroika lies in the fact that it unites socialism with democracy and revives the Leninist concept of socialist construction both in theory and in practice. Such is the essence of perestroika, which accounts for its genuine revolutionary spirit and its all-embracing scope. . . .  

“Perestroika is closely connected with socialism as a system. That side of the matter is being widely discussed, especially abroad, and our talk about perestroika won’t be entirely clear if we don’t touch upon that aspect.  

“Does perestroika mean that we are giving up socialism or at least some of its foundations? Some ask this question with hope, others with misgiving. . . .  

“To put an end to all the rumors and speculations that abound in the West about this, I would like to point out once again that we are conducting all our reforms in accordance with the socialist choice. We are looking within socialism, rather than outside it, for the answers to all the questions that arise. We assess our successes and errors alike by socialist standards. Those who hope that we shall move away from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed. Every part of our program of perestroika—and the program as a whole, for that matter—is fully based on the principle of more socialism and more democracy” (Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 35-36). 

If you are skeptical about the “fall” of communism being a false flag, so be it; but you just read Gorbachev admit the lie and you are now accountable for his testimony. 

Joel Skousen, Christopher Story, David M. Balmforth, Ken Bowers, Cliff Kincaid, and Jeff Nyquist, are several others who have written about this fake “fall.” We are a small band of brothers, however. Not many people buy what we are selling. Few want to hear that the Russians and the Chinese are preparing for our nuclear annihilation. Conservatives, hoodwinked by clever communist disinformation, especially don’t want to hear that Putin isn’t on our side. They are comfortable with their misconception that Putin is a great warrior against the New World Order, when in fact he is an integral part of it and is attempting to establish his own version. 

Since the Bolshevik coup in 1917, Russia has been marked by the global Elite as the hammer that will pound out the New World Order. Since the Cold War began, Russia has been given the task of starting World War III when the time is right. This is evident in the way that Russia has been flippant for decades about threatening nuclear destruction whenever anyone even remotely crosses them. Their threats have been so frequent that  

In 2018, I wrote: 

“In recent years, the scarlet Beast has noticeably stirred and only sloppily continues the propaganda that the Soviet Union is gone. Instead, Soviet Russia and Red China are openly arming at breakneck speed and Russian leaders constantly threaten the West with nuclear war. . . . 

“[After the attempted assassination of Russian defector Sergei Skripal claimed to have been Russia’s handiwork] Britain expelled 23 Russian spies, threatened to close the KGB-created Russia Today (RT) news station, and gave Russia 24 hours to respond to its allegations. In response, Russian spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “One does not give 24 hours notice to a nuclear power.” Again, this is a thinly veiled threat of nuclear war in the Soviet tradition. It goes right along with what Putin himself has said that “a bear will not ask anyone for permission,” referring, of course, to the symbolism of Russia as the bear. 

“Again, during the final editing of this book, two Russian nuclear-capable bombers flew precariously close to the Aleutian Islands in Alaska and were intercepted by U.S. F-22s. In an article about the incident, a Pentagon weapons expert, Mark Schneider, is quoted as saying these provocative bomber routes are a deliberate attempt by Russia to intimidate the West. He also said: “Threatening people with nuclear weapons is Russia’s national sport.” From the dozens of Russian threats I’ve seen just during my own lifetime in the supposed “post-Soviet” era, I have to concur with Schneider’s analysis” (Zack Strong, Red Gadiantons: What the Prophets Have Taught about the Communist Secret Combination that Threatens Mankind). 

Please note that the above excerpt was written in 2018. I am not writing this present article to hop on the bandwagon of people now warning of nuclear war. I have been warning about Russia’s nuclear threats and blackmail for many years – long before the invention of social media and long before I had any sort of audience. 

Literally every year of my life since I began studying Russia in the late 90’s, at least one or more Russian politician or military figure has threatened the West with nuclear war. It’s so routine that it barely makes the news. Can you imagine how the international press would lose their minds if American leaders routinely threatened anyone with nuclear war? Incidents of the latter have only happened a few times, but cases of Russia doing the same are legion. Who, then, are the real lunatics on the world stage? 

In a 2016 article, John Grady wrote: 

“The Soviet Union’s old doctrine was: You deter World War III with nuclear weapons. Now Russia’s new doctrine: Threaten to use nuclear weapons against any major power that may try to block Moscow from having its way in a regional conflict, a specialist [Nikolai Sokov] in Russian nuclear strategy said on Monday. 

“Speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Nikolai Sokov said, “The targets are military.” A slide he used at the presentation before the Washington, D.C., think-tank, showed the targets could be reached by medium or heavy bombers and include bomber bases in the United States; aircraft carrier battle groups in the Baltic and Pacific; as well as those in the Indian Ocean and Black Sea-Mediterranean. 

“. . . He noted Russian exercises in 2003 carried out a simulated nuclear strike against Diego Garcia, and in 2007, against Guam. . . . 

“. . . He added, “Generally speaking, Russian love nuclear weapons. . . . If you don’t have nuclear weapons, that’s when you lose sleep.” 

“Pavel Podvig, director of the Geneva-based Russian nuclear forces project, said, “Strategic forces play a role supporting whatever moves Russia makes,” including Ukraine, Crimea or Georgia. The threat of escalation in a regional conflict is “a deliberate policy of Russian leaders because nobody wants” to engage in nuclear conflict for limited stakes.” 

Russia routinely runs simulations and drills focusing on NATO or the United States as its primary adversary. Who else would they need to use nukes against, Spain? The real target of all Russian aggression is the United States. But the final strike won’t come until the enemy feels we are softened up sufficiently. The softening up process is well underway with cultural Marxism gutting our institutions and Russian propaganda confusing the Americans who should know better (i.e. gullible conservatives). There may even be attacks against NATO in Europe designed as a final warning to the United States or to split apart the alliance. 

In February, just before Putin went back on his public pledge to not invade Ukraine, the dictator spoke in France. He warned the European Union that they wouldn’t have time to blink before being hit with nuclear apocalypse if they dared mobilize to combat Russian aggression. He raged

“Do you understand it or not, that if Ukraine joins Nato and attempts to bring Crimea back by military means, the European countries will be automatically pulled into a war conflict with Russia?  

“Of course, Russia and Nato [military] potentials are incomparable. We understand it. But we also understand that Russia is one of the leading nuclear states. 

“There will be no winners, and you will be pulled into this conflict against your will. 

“You won’t even have time to blink your eye when you execute Article 5.” 

Days away from launching an invasion of a neighboring state, the Russian dictator threatened Europe with both conventional and nuclear war. He did it in his Aesopian, doublespeak manner – indirect, but clear enough for anyone paying attention to understand.  

Was this the only time Putin has threatened nuclear war? No. A quick ten-minute web search produced the following articles and videos. Most are from 2022, but a few are from past years. I won’t quote them all, but I reproduce their headlines to give you the flavor of what’s going on. Each story is hyperlinked, if you desire to research more deeply. 

Vladimir Putin Has Threatened Nuclear War at Least 35 Times—U.K.’s Johnson” 

Those Nuclear Threats from Moscow? U.K. Is Not Making Them Up” 

Russian state TV threatens nuclear strike on UK and warns of radioactive tidal wave” 

Russian State TV Threatens to Annihilate the U.K. With 1,600-Foot-Tall Nuclear Tsunamis” 

Russian State TV Argues Over Using Nuclear War to Threaten U.S.” 

Russia threatens to NUKE US cities with 6,000mph hypersonic Zircon missile if war breaks out after ‘successful’ test” 

Russian lawmaker threatens Putin could destroy ‘entire US east coast’ with 2 missiles” 

Russia threatens to wipe out the entire US with just four Satan II missiles in chilling warning over Ukraine” 

Russian Official Threatens Nuclear Strike On U.S., Wipe Out Both Coasts With 4 ‘Satan-2’ Missiles” 

Donetsk Militia Commander Says Nukes Are ‘only Option’ To Defeat NATO Amid War In Ukraine” 

Putin vows any country who threatens Russia with nukes will be ‘wiped off face of the Earth’ – and he may strike FIRST” 

“Nuking” London & Paris – Russian State-TV Threatens To Annihilate European Cities Using ‘Mighty’ Sarmat Missiles” 

Russia Just Threatened To Destroy Ireland And Britain With A Nuclear Tsunami” 

‘This Is Not a Bluff’: Putin Threatens Nuclear Response in Ukraine War” 

As Russia Threatens Nukes, The US Has Limited Options” 

Russia Threatens Nukes in Baltic if Sweden, Finland Join NATO” 

Russia threatens to move nukes to Baltic region if Finland, Sweden join NATO” 

Russia Activates Strategic Nuclear Forces & Special Combat Mode; Russian Nukes Go Hot.” 

Russia activates ‘doomsday’ submarine armed with nuke torpedoes” 

Putin warning to UK: Russian president activates Yars nuclear-capable missiles in silo near Moscow” 

Russia ‘Activates’ Nuclear ICBM RS-24 Yars That Is 12x Stronger Than US Atomic Bomb That Struck Hiroshima” 

Russia releases video of nuclear-capable ICBM being loaded into silo, following reports that US is preparing to send Patriot missiles to Ukraine” 

Russia Activates Forces Trained to Operate in Radioactive Contamination” 

Russia threatens to use nukes. Again.” 

Putin floats possibility that Russia may abandon ‘no first use’ nuclear doctrine” 

Putin says Russia could adopt US preemptive strike concept” 

Russia threatens to unleash NUKES on Britain & US after battle with Ukraine over ‘out of control’ nuclear mega-plant” 

Russia readies a SECOND monster Yars nuke for combat – as pro-Putin MP threatens ‘hotbed of all nastiness’ London with missile strike” 

Russian MP threatened Azerbaijan with a nuclear strike, the Kremlin had to intervene” 

Nord Stream pipelines hit by suspicious leaks in possible sabotage; Russia says it has ‘a right’ to use nuclear weapons” 

Russia’s Lavrov: Threat of nuclear war ‘should not be underestimated’” 

Threat Of Nuclear War? Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Warns Of Nuclear Threat” 

Russia Threatens Nuclear Third World War” 

Russia Threatens to Nuke Britain, France, and Germany” 

For good measure, here are a few more nuclear threats against the United States and her allies from Russia’s comrades China, North Korea, and Iran: 

China’s nuclear threats are following on the heels of Russia’s threats and should be a US wake-up call” 

CHINESE GOVERNMENT THREATENS NUCLEAR WAR: ‘WE WILL USE NUCLEAR BOMBS CONTINUOUSLY’” 

China threatens to nuke Japan over Taiwan in video played on CCP-sanctioned channel” 

“WE ARE WARNING JAPAN”: CHINESE GROUP THREATENS NUCLEAR BOMBS AND “A FULL-SCALE WAR”” 

China threatens US with ‘intense nuclear showdown’ as it ramps up atomic program as a ‘vital deterrent against America’” 

China Threatens Nuclear War if U.S. Continues Investigating COVID-19 Origins” 

North Korea’s Kim threatens to use nukes amid tensions with US, South Korea” 

North Korea warns it will use nuclear weapons if South Korea attacks” 

North Korea Threatens U.S.: Nuclear Attack ‘The Only Option Left’” 

North Korea Threatens Nuclear Strike on U.S.” 

Iran Threatens to ‘Build Nuclear Warheads’ to Turn NY Into ‘Hellish Ruins’” 

Iran threatens nuclear explosion in Israel’s Dimona facility” 

400 Seconds! Iran Sends ‘Front Page’ Threat To Israel; Says Its Hypersonic Missile Can Destroy Tel Aviv In Under 7 Minutes” 

Perhaps the final ironic word on the matter was made by Russian politician Evgeny Popov who said: “We’re not threatening to anybody with our nuclear weapon. We just tell you that we have nuclear weapon . . . using nuclear weapons in the 21st century, it’s an insane decision. We are not insane.” 

Putin said he wouldn’t invade Ukraine right up until the moment his tanks rolled over the Ukrainian border. He said he wouldn’t conscript Russians, then he did. He refuses to acknowledge the bloodshed in Ukraine as a war; it is, rather, a “special military operation” to “protect Russians.” Protect them from what? From the fictitious “genocide” he claimed was happening in February by “Nazis.” 

Everything Russia says is an inversion of reality, a distortion of truth, or a blatant lie. If you think Russia is “not insane,” please account for all their repeated threats to nuke London, Germany, France, NATO, and the United States. If that isn’t insane, nothing is. If Russian leaders aren’t insane, no one is. 

How many times do Russian and Chinese state media have to threaten nuclear war or show graphics of missiles firing from Russia and exploding in London or U.S. territory before we take the coming nuclear war seriously? As a nation, we are not prepared. Some of us are preparing, but most still deny the plain reality that Russia threatens nuclear war like it’s a bodily function. It’s their biggest and baddest trump card, and they know it. 

A soviet bio-chemical weapons expert, Igor Shafhid, wrote a book about his experiences. He explained the Russian mindset regarding weapons of mass destruction and why he deems unclear holocaust inevitable. He warned: 

“Anti-Christian regimes know that faith can protect a free will and a sound mind. That is why Lenin feared religious belief. Religion was not an opposition to his communist ideology; locking up a church door was effective enough, but faith rooted in the heart spread like wildfire, and that worried him. How could he get a society to worship him if they loved God more? This is why he called them “believers” and strove hard to stop those who preached the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Religion is never a threat, but relationship is. Lenin knew that people’s minds founded in faith and dedicated to Christ Jesus would be hard to conquer. . . . 

“Mind control is a great terror weapon bludgeoning today’s churches . . . Phony religious leaders use similar tactics to control assemblages within churches, as did . . . Stalin. “The worst mistake a Christian can make is in believing that all churches are safe zones. Not so. In Soviet Russia the government used churches to validate their constitution’s “freedom of religion,” using pastors hired by the KGB as a guise to fool the people. True believers were beaten and imprisoned, and few citizens were made aware of this. “The numerous false doctrines spreading across the world, and the extra-biblical, esoteric experiences that are introduced with these “new” revelations are a great preparatory tool for mass mind manipulation. This kind of seduction works well because feelings are involved. Forming an anti-christ government cannot be accomplished without mind control, and the church is the first to be targeted. . . . 

“. . . When the nations fight against the antichrist army, they won’t be reverting to outdated sabers and cannons. Nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare are the advanced weapons of this age, and it would not seem plausible that these weapons would be ignored during the great tribulation time. . . .  

“We should never become complacent. There are enough WMDs developed now to destroy this world, but Satan has not yet succeeded in his mission. There is unfinished business between him and God, and he plans on taking as many onto his side as he can.  

“How can he effectively get humankind to bow before him? Force and bullying hasn’t worked too well in the past, but he knows his most ingenious plan will work, and he has been perfecting it and bringing it to completion for hundreds of years. Deceptive love, false promises of peace, and mind control are his greatest tools in this plan. How does he accomplish this deception? By fooling people, of course, into thinking they can live in a good and peaceful world without wars or famine or terrorism. His devoted followers have pushed his deceptive agenda by participating in elite societies, clubs and orders – all of these different groups united secretly to bring about this socialistic new world order. . . .  

“When Satan’s real mask is removed at the end of time, then he will be exposed for what he is, the father of lies. Many nations will become confused and start fighting against him during the Battle of Armageddon. Satan’s evil that prompted humankind to develop the WMD will come in handy for him to destroy God’s creation. He knows that an ungodly nation that harbors nuclear/biological/chemical weapons, such as Russia, China, and North Korea, are excellent candidates for using this weaponry as a “power” to horsewhip other nations under their submission. I remember all too well in the Soviet army how I reveled in the fact that my country had so much power over all the other nations. Let us not be naïve; those thoughts are still alive in the Russian Federation. That is why the Russian military recently started refreshing its new generation of ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles), which have been lying in stockpiles for years, and have been placing them inside strategic controlled areas. Those that fight to do away with weapons of mass destruction will not succeed, because no one nation will give up its place for power – and the Day of Wrath will come, and nuclear war will be inevitable” (Igor V. Shafhid, Inside the Red Zone: Physical and Spiritual Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction, 83-85, 160-163). 

What I like about this quote is the Christian lens through which it sizes up events. At its core, what we are witnessing is a progression of the spiritual war started by Lucifer in Heaven before man stepped foot on earth (see Revelation 12). 

We must acknowledge several facts. First, God exists and His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, is the Redeemer of mankind. Second, Their enemy is Satan, a frighteningly real being of supreme malevolence who controls most world leaders and, thus, their arsenals of destructive weapons. Third, Satan will not allow his faux kingdom to fall peacefully – he will take as many of us with him as he can first. And that means nuclear and bio-chemical war, famine, economic collapse, and global chaos. 

I repeat: Nuclear war is going to happen because Satan controls the men who control the world’s nuclear weapons. The Apostle Paul taught us to look beyond flesh and blood to discern the reality: 

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12). 

The Apostle John similarly foretold of our day in his aptly-named Apocalypse. He spoke of two beasts upheld by Satan’s hand which would terrorize the earth and afflict the disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. I now quote nearly all of Revelation 13. I pray you will see the relevance: 

“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. 

“And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon [i.e. Satan] gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. 

“And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 

“And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 

“And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 

“And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 

“And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. 

“And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. 

“If any man have an ear, let him hear. 

“He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. 

“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. 

“And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 

“And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, 

“And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 

“And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 

“And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name” (Revelation 13:1-17). 

Many have assumed the first beast is the New World Order – perhaps led by the Western socialistic Anglo-American/NATO faction. Regardless of which faction is more powerful, it is a global dictatorship with multiple heads that oppresses mankind. This terrible beast reigns with terror over the earth for a short period of time. I believe we are living in the prophesied day of its global power, and that it is being prepared for a great and violent fall in the very near future. 

What of this first beast’s head that is wounded, but is healed? The first beast apparently dies a bloody death after a short period of dubious glory. The second beast, which is a second vicious dictatorship that comes up out of the earth (likely out of Europe), compels people to “worship” the first beast whose wound was “healed.” I believe this means the head of the first beast whose seemingly fatal wound was healed. This second beast is synonymous with Gog and Magog that will lead the charge of the wicked Gentile nations against Israel in the Battle of Armageddon. 

Is it possible that the beast “whose deadly wound was healed” is the communist conspiracy which feigned death (i.e. the “fall” of the USSR) and which everyone thinks is a relic of the past? I believe it is. Farley Anderson made this same case in his book The Book of Revelation Today: The Last of the Last Days: Who, What, Where, When, Why and How. He pointed out that John described the beast as “scarlet” – red. On page 22 of his book, Farley Anderson suggested: “Identifying the beast as satanic communism may be as simple as asking who the reds are.” 

Who are the Reds? The Reds, the communists, are the original “globalists.” I despise the term “globalist” because it is vague and insufficient. Using the term “communists,” however, tells you precisely who these people are and what they believe. They stand for the planks of The Communist Manifesto, including the abolition of private property, the abolition of the family, the dethroning of God, an international dictatorship, violent revolution, centralized banking, government-controlled education, and so forth. 

The communists, the Reds, are the ones who have promoted “world revolution” and who developed organizations, such as the Comintern and Cominform and hundreds of other secret or front organizations, to promote world revolution in every nation. The communists have been aided by socialists in the West, particularly those in high finance. But it is the communists who have done the dirty work and who have accomplished more towards subjecting the world under a one-world order than the Western socialists ever have. Even the ESG tyranny being rolled out was first instituted and perfected in Red China

The leading communists today, like Marx, Lenin, and Gorbachev of the past, are Satanists and take their marching orders directly from Satan (perhaps under the guise of Lord Maitreya). This is the greatest confirmation we have that nuclear war is coming down the pike. Satan hates us and wants to destroy us. If there is any chance that humanity could awake to his schemes and overthrown his earthly minions, he will use his demon-possessed followers to collapse the entire system and reign with blood and horror on the earth. 

Sure enough, humanity is awaking to their awful reality. Satan’s mask is falling. More and more people are recognizing his followers as servants of sin. Many are also recognizing Satan as the true power behind the throne. They are mobilizing against him and rallying against his statist-socialist-communist system of tyranny. 

Call this wicked system “globalism” if you like being vague, but this devilish ideology is the same that occultists Weishaupt, Marx, Lenin, and Stalin promoted. The world revolution of today is the same as 1776, 1848, and 1917. Satan controlled the revolution then and he controls it now. I wrote about the present continuation of this vile conspiracy in “The Ongoing Bolshevik Revolution.” 

Satan has used various nations and groups to do his bidding throughout time. He is using NATO and the United States government, yes, but he is also still using KGB-controlled Russia and CCP-controlled China. He plays them all off against each other in a twisted dialectical game. He controls them all and some high-level figures in these nations understand that they are all part of a global system of Satanic tyranny. However, because there is no honor among thieves and because each of these power centers wants to be in charge, Satan will cajole them to fight. The war has already begun; it simply hasn’t escalated to the level of previous world wars yet. Some of the conspirators may be deluded enough to believe they are only fulfilling their own national or personal interests when they are in fact serving Satan and building his world occult dictatorship. 

The Evil One will inspire his followers, who are as wicked and heartless as he is, to unleash genocide and oppression on the world through horrific means, including engineered famines, plagues, economic collapse, police state repression, and world war. What weapons will be used in the coming world war? Igor Shafhid told us precisely which ones would be used: “nuclear/biological/chemical weapons,” or WMDs. When Satan’s fury finally flows like lava, “nuclear war will be inevitable” and Joel’s “blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke” will be seen across the world (Joel 2:30). 

This tyranny is so obvious and crushing that, finally, the slaves are rising. Yet, Satan will not allow this uprising to succeed. He will crash everything down around us and attempt to forge his totalitarian one-world order out of the atomic ashes of our present society. Prophecy informs us, however, that his beasts, vicious as they are, will fail him and his counterfeit kingdom will crumble. Its last cursed remnants will be totally obliterated at the Lord’s return in glory. 

Dear reader, nuclear World War III is inevitable. It will happen. I think it will happen soon – perhaps within several short years. It is barreling down upon us, yet most people are only just starting to see and hear the signs and are reacting agonizingly slowly. They are asleep; spiritually asleep. Are you? 

Now is the time to wake up! Now is the time to board the ark. Now is the time to choose a side and prepare for the cleansing of the earth, the close of this present epoch of darkness, and the ushering in of an era of light. 

Zack Strong, 
December 17, 2022

War of Words

The terminology we use is important. Words possess real power. Language can destroy or build, tear down or uplift, divide or unite, disenfranchise or empower, and demoralize or inspire. 

The enemies of humanity have devoted an extreme amount of time and financial resources to hijacking, manipulating, misusing, canceling, and altering language. By this means, they have denounced patriots as traitors and trumpeted traitors as patriots, blamed the guiltless for their own crimes while making themselves appear innocent, and made good seem evil and evil seem good. 

In 2018, Benjamin R. Dierker, writing for The Federalist, put out a piece discussing the effort to mold language to push the anti-Freedom agenda and fundamentally transform society: 

“Word games take many forms, and honest people must call it out . . . Underlying each tactic is misuse of words. 

“This isn’t innocent linguistic drift or slang; it is a conscious effort to reshape society. The schemes include redefining words for personal gain, using modifiers to alter the meaning of a word, replacing technical words with colloquial ones, and creating new words. Each of these is a bullying tactic, which distort effective discourse. 

“It starts with misusing words or defining them based on circumstance rather than objective meaning. The entire purpose of defined language is to hold constant meaning so others can understand. Situational use starts to condition how people feel about words, building up a new connotation. 

“The classic example is the word “liberal,” which the far-left co-opted. It was adopted because of its positive connotation, and used as a cover for imposing greater leftist control under the guise of liberty. In reality, there is nothing liberal about failing to protect life, burdening individuals with regulations and taxes, or forcing individuals to provide services to others. This is no accidental misnomer, but strategic messaging to influence people. Who doesn’t want to support a policy that is “progressive,” “pro-choice,” or “affordable”? 

“When the word cannot be flipped, other words are sometimes added to suggest a new meaning. In the case of firearms, the new popular phrase is “assault rifle.” Webster’s Dictionary was happy to update its definition to help nudge society in the right direction. The effect is a stronger connotation, which plays on people’s emotion and visceral reactions to the phrase. . . . 

“Wholly disassociating words from their accepted meaning opened an entirely new realm of possibility for leftists. By separating gender from sex, linguistic activists tore the very fabric of mutual understanding, and created a new class of victims, and by definition, a new class of offenders. Pronouns, the simplest way to identify another party, are now subject to feelings. 

“Defining words on subjective views defeats the purpose of language, because it creates an endless guessing game, and empowers the other party to choose when to reward and when to punish the speaker. By sabotaging the accepted unity of sex and gender, dozens of new pronouns sprang into existence. 

“New words do not harm discourse, unless they are thrust upon people and enforced through speech codes. Controlling how people speak is the implicit goal of this movement, which combined with anti-hate-speech activism seeks to empower the Left as the arbiters of morality and to punish those who wrongfully use language—ironically, achieved by abusing language themselves.” 

We can all inherently see how dangerous it is to subject words to feelings and substitute the rule of law with the rule of men – madmen. The inmates are running the asylum, but they got into that position by first getting into your mind and changing your thoughts, vocabulary, and forms of expression. To break their spell, you must take back the English language, learn how to effectively communicate, discard the ludicrous definitions and linguistic straitjacket they have imposed on public discourse, and speak truth regardless of whether it is politically incorrect, socially accepted, or considered “offensive” by the social engineers and their brainwashed followers. 

We now analyze other examples of the intentional linguistic distortions that have been used so regularly by the controlled press, Hollywood, academia, activists, and politicians that they have warped popular culture and indoctrinated millions. 

The anti-gun radicals are busy in Congress, the courts, and media denouncing our natural, God-given, constitutionally-explicit right to keep and bear arms as at attack on the right of life. Yet, these same anti-gun activists are generally pro-abortion, which is a blatant and brutal attack on the right of life. The hypocrisy is stunning! 

To establish the hypocrisy, I quote from Democrat Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal. During debate on an assault weapons ban currently in Congress, Jayapal whined

“Mr. Chairman, my colleague across the aisle said we have the right to defend ourselves. What about our right to live? . . . [An assault weapons ban] is a ban that the majority of Americans support . . . Today, I dare my Republican colleagues to stop looking away. Stop ignoring the tragedy that is faced by people across this country . . . It is our duty to stop these killings . . . So, for every person who says I have a right to defend, I say to you, we have a right to life. And your right to defend with a weapon of war does not obliterate our right to live.” 

This is the same demonic traitor who previously Tweeted

“Today, a right-wing Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade. 

“As one of the one in four women in this country who has had an abortion — I am outraged. . . . 

“Pregnant people no longer have the personal freedom to make decisions about our own bodies with a doctor or loved one. Instead, those decisions will be made for us by politicians.” 

Do you see the vicious hypocrisy that a politician who wants to dictate how we defend ourselves complains that politicians are meddling with her “right” to kill kids? “I am outraged” that this wicked traitor hasn’t been, along with her Marxist comrades infesting our government, taken and strung up by the People for being oath-breakers and fighting so hard to trample the rights declared sacrosanct in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. Despicable. 

These types of depraved baby killers have repeated ad nauseum the scientifically-disproven notion that babies are “clumps of cells” in the womb to ease their consciences about murdering them. They institutionally slaughter babies by the tens of millions, but come out in rage and indignation against guns; that is, against inanimate objects that are neither good nor evil, but are mere tools that can be used by good or evil people for good or evil purposes. 

There is no mention by the rights-devouring jackals of the inconvenient fact that guns are used by innocent Americans between 2 and 3 million times a year in self-defense against criminals. A great example just happened in Indiana on July 17 when the 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken, who was constitutionally carrying a firearm in a pathetic gun-free mall defended himself, his girlfriend, and a room full of people, against a would-be mass murderer. 

Which of the would-be victims in the mall that day will dare come out and denounce this young man or wish the government had stripped him of his firearm? Was the gun the bad guy in this scenario? Was is the good guy? Neither. Elisjsha, using a gun, saved countless lives. He was the good guy. The perpetrator, also using a gun, wanted to murder dozens. He was the bad guy. The gun, therefore, is neutral and has no inherent moral standing. It depends how it is used. 

Abortion, however, is nearly always elective (i.e. medically unnecessary) and, thus, is predominantly evil. Not only can we justly attach a moral stigma to baby-murder, but the practice is a clear violation of the right of life we all are meant, by our Creator, to enjoy. The Declaration of Independence confirms that the right of life is one of the things our forefathers fought the War for Independence about. 

Since 1776, it has been one of the express purposes of the U.S. government to defend the right of life of the People. Yet, the abortion activists screech that their “rights” are being violated when we attempt to prevent them from killing kids. In truth, they are the ones violating the right of life. It is not a violation of one’s free will to prevent them from taking the life of an innocent human being. 

To further ease their screaming consciences about snuffing out the lives of defenseless babies, however, these radicals label their atrocities “pro-choice” and pretend that they are the real victims of oppression. They claim this disgusting act is a “right.” Yet, we can’t have both the right to life and the “right” to abortion because the two are contradictions. Only one is a right; the other is an abomination. 

These baby killers have also said the despicable act is “liberating.” It takes serious mental gymnastics to believe that killing an innocent, precious child is “liberating.” The Satanic Temple has taken it a step further, however, elevating baby-murder to a “sacrament” and arguing it is a religious rite protected by the First Amendment. Not only is this the epitome of blasphemy, but it is a perversion of rule of law, the law of nature, and American-style republicanism. 

Another term that should make you bristle is “government money.” The government has no money. In the first place, government is an agent of the People. They are elected and are accountable to us, not the other way around. That they may tax fairly and equally is constitutionally-established. But they have perverted this delegated power to tax and oversee money by establishing a privately-owned, foreign-controlled “national” bank deceptively called the Federal Reserve that prints and manipulates currency at will and by instituting graduated taxation straight out of The Communist Manifesto. The name “Federal Reserve” is another of those word manipulations since the Federal Reserve is not part of the federal government and since it has zero reserves. 

The U.S. government, which the Federal Reserve has openly said it is not accountable to, is, with the central bank, the most fiscally irresponsible entity in existence and the United States now sits at nearly $31 trillion in the hole. Andrew Jackson fought and defeated this banker cabal in his day because he saw how dangerous it was to American sovereignty, prosperity, and Freedom. Jackson was a Jeffersonian in principle. The great Thomas Jefferson had previously opposed Hamilton’s Anglophile national bank scheme and warned that banks and reckless spending would plunge the nation into bondage: 

“And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale” (Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, May 28, 1816). 

We also err when we talk of the U.S. dollar as “money.” It is not money. It is fiat paper currency backed by nothing but false hope and empty promises. It is not backed by gold or silver as the U.S. Constitution requires. Our economy is a house of cards that is beginning to implode because it is based on paper instead of something of substance. Thomas Jefferson said of paper money: 

“The bankruptcies in London have recommenced with new force. There is no saying where this fire will end. Perhaps in the general conflagration of all their paper. If not now, it must ere long. With only 20 millions of coin, and three or four hundred million of circulating paper, public and private, nothing is necessary but a general panic, produced either by failures, invasion or any other cause, and the whole visionary fabric vanishes into air and shews that paper is poverty, that it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself” (Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, May 27, 1788). 

The Father of our Country, George Washington, was also opposed to fictitious paper money, telling Thomas Jefferson in a letter: 

“Some other States are, in my opinion, falling into very foolish & wicked plans of emitting paper money. I cannot however give up my hopes & expectations that we shall ere long adopt a more liberal system of policy. What circumstances will lead, or what misfortunes will compel us to it, is more than can be told without the spirit of prophecy” (George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, August 1, 1786). 

A short six months later, General Washington wrote even more bluntly to Jabez Bowen: 

“Paper money has had the effect in your State that it ever will have, to ruin commerce—oppress the honest, and open a door to every species of fraud and injustice” (George Washinton to Jabez Bowen, January, January 9, 1787). 

Despite the death spiral our ghost of an economy is in, the current regime continues to say all is well and that we have the strongest economy on record. What a lie! Everyone knows this is false. Everyone sees the massive price increases at the grocery store. Everyone feels the stab of inflation at the pumps. Everyone knows it is a lie, yet the lies persist and the People accept it; grudgingly, to be sure, but they accept it nonetheless and refuse to rise up against the tyrants who have hijacked our nation

Among the many lies told by our government and media is the whopper that vaccines are “safe and effective.” Everyone who has taken the time to study the matter knows that no vaccine is safe, that vaccines have never eradicated any disease, and that the damage done by vaccines to humanity in the form of cancer, brain damage, autism, allergies, miscarriages, Sudden Instant Death Syndrome (SIDS), kidney failure, autoimmune disorders, heart attacks, and so forth, is nothing short of deliberate genocide. Vaccine science is Satanic science. This vaccination voodoo is complete and utter hokum. 

To cite only six excellent researchers who have exposed the corruption of the vaccine industry and the grave danger of vaccines, see Dr. Suzanne Humphries and her excellent book Dissolving Illusions, Dr. Judy Mikovits and her book Ending Plague, Dr. Sheri Tenpenny, Dr. Joseph Mercola, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and Dr. Thomas Cowan and his book Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness as well as the research of the Weston A. Price Foundation to which he belongs. 

The Coronahoax was the ultimate in gaslighting and deception. First, the Trump government said “two weeks to stop the spread.” Never forget it was a Republican regime that locked down America and started the mass vaccine genocide program. Then the regime and state governments used the momentum to shut down the country, destroy travel, derail the economy, smash the middle class, curtail religious Liberty, suspend the Constitution, unconstitutionally expand the size of government, convince people to inhibit their oxygen by strapping ineffective masks over their faces, and terrify millions into getting an experimental vaccine that has since terminated the lives of tens of thousands of people and crippled countless more. If you take nothing else out of this article, take away a healthy skepticism of Big Pharma, the medical-industrial complex, and doctors generally. 

Two other common refrains are, first, that “you can be whatever you want to be” and, second, that “you are perfect just the way you are.” Both of these cheerful slogans are false and dangerous. Society has pushed the first one into the realm of mental illness. Transgenderism is a mental illness and it is symptomatic of the idea that we can be whatever we want to be. If we are a woman, we can be a man. If we are a man, we can be a woman. If we are a human, we can be a cat. Facts are fluid in minds that have accepted “you can be whatever you want to be” as doctrine instead of accepting the truth that men are men and women are women and that can never change regardless of all the cosmetic surgeries and hormone pills a person takes. 

The second is wishful thinking. Is a morbidly obese person “perfect just the way they are”? Is “every body beautiful”? No! While beauty is subjective, doctors, nutritionists, and scientists can indeed objectively state that obesity is dangerous and unhealthy and that being fit and eating right is better for longevity, productiveness, health, and happiness. What is beautiful about blubber? What is attractive about laziness and uncleanness? A few extra pounds – who really cares? But living a slovenly, sedentary, comatose life is unhealthy, unproductive, unattractive, soul-sapping, and damaging to everyone. 

Eating white refined sugar, regularly drinking soda, drinking alcohol, smoking, drinking psychoactive coffee, doing drugs, consuming GMO food, staring at a screen all day long, exposing yourself to harmful radiation, watching porn, sleeping around, cohabitating – these are all objectively damaging. If you are lazy, fat, unhealthy, sedentary, uneducated, uninvolved in society, undeveloped in your communication skills, immodest in your dress and language, and so forth, you are not “perfect just the way you are” and you need to shape up. 

See https://www.facebook.com/TraditionalWest/

Another big lie is to call the horde of illegal invaders rushing across our southern border “undocumented aliens.” To be here without documents is, by definition. to be here illegally. To commit an illegal act means you have violated some law (whether that law is just is another matter). It means, legally speaking, you are a criminal. Why, then, do people allow the enemy to restrict their language – which is an essential part of their power as a free individual – and induce them to use insufficient words that downplay the seriousness of this crime? 

Religious leader Elder Neal A. Maxwell once made a statement that applies to everything covered so far in this article and everything below. He observed truthfully: 

“The more what is politically correct seeks to replace what God has declared correct, the more ineffective approaches to human problems there will be, all reminding us of C. S. Lewis’s metaphor about those who run around with fire extinguishers in times of flood. For instance, there are increasing numbers of victims of violence and crime, yet special attention is paid to the rights of criminals. Accompanying an ever increasing addiction to pornography are loud alarms against censorship. Rising illegitimacy destroys families and threatens the funding capacities of governments; nevertheless, chastity and fidelity are mocked. These and other consequences produce a harsh cacophony. When Nero fiddled as Rome burned, at least he made a little music! I have no hesitancy, brothers and sisters, in stating that unless checked, permissiveness, by the end of its journey, will cause humanity to stare in mute disbelief at its awful consequences. 

“Ironically, as some people become harder, they use softer words to describe dark deeds. This, too, is part of being sedated by secularism!” (Elder Neal A. Maxwell, “Becometh as a Child,” General Conference, April, 1996). 

Yes, the act of mutilating language beyond recognition and sense will aid us on our journey to hell and destruction. This is by design by the enemy of mankind and his willing minions which are strategically embedded in society. 

The enemy loves to use buzz words to smear patriotic opposition to their Satanic schemes. Favorite smears include: Anti-Semite; Nazi; Fascist; racist; imperialist; jingoist; isolationist; nationalist; white supremacist; Christo-Fascist; KKK; homophobic; transphobic; bigot; intolerant; religious extremist; right-wing extremist; and domestic terrorist. 

If you criticize communism, you are immediately labeled an “anti-Semite” and a “Nazi” (perhaps Shakespeare’s paraphrase “methinks thou dost protest too much” is applicable here; also, read what Winston Churchill said about who runs communism here). If you oppose the scourge of black crime in America, they call you a “racist” instead of a realist. If you oppose illegal immigration and drugs and sex slavers flooding across our southern border, they call you “racist” and claim you’re not compassionate – as if keeping the border wide open and encouraging people to make the long trek up to the States along which they will be raped, abused, kidnapped, extorted, or killed by drug cartels is “compassionate.” If you oppose foreign wars, they call you an “isolationist.” If you support intervention to stop criminal regimes abroad, they call you an “imperialist.” If you love America, they call you a “nationalist” – as if putting your country first a bad thing! If you oppose men or women betraying their biology, going against nature, and copulating with the same gender on either scientific or religious grounds, they call you “homophobic” and “hateful.” If you dare suggest that universal morality or, worse, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, have a place at the table in public discourse, schools, media, entertainment, or the halls of government, they call you a “religious extremist,” a “bigot,” or a “Christo-Fascist.” If you refuse to accept, embrace, and bow before the throne of evil, perversion, and collectivist tyranny, you are called “intolerant,” a “right-wing extremist,” or a “domestic terrorist.” So be it! 

Wear the labels proudly, fellow freeman. Wear them as a badge of honor and as proof that your resistance to tyranny is having an effect. Don’t cower before the mindless mob. Don’t be afraid of outlandish and idiotic slurs like “racist” and “Nazi.” If opposing statism makes you a “Nazi,” so be it! Either rebuff the word-manipulators and their overused, tired, absurd smears or embrace them with the knowledge they have no meaning to intelligent people. 

Heretofore, all of my criticisms have been leveled specifically at the Western language manglers. However, the East mastered the art of deception long before we did. KGB-trained dictator Vladimir Putin could teach a master class on manipulation. Russians have a history of always lying and deceiving. It’s part of their culture – political and otherwise. From Potemkin villages to Soviet forgery factories to Putin’s famous doublespeak, Russia is the ultimate master of manipulation and many of the destructive word and thought trends in America were imported from Russia by Soviet moles and agents of subversion. 

And that’s what this all boils down to – communism. People often prefer the more ambiguous term “globalism,” but the agenda of the “globalists” is a savage form of socialism and corporatism patterned off of Bolshevistic communism in the Soviet Union. Lenin called the Western counterpart “state capitalism.” Whatever you call it, the Eastern and Western proponents are disciples of Karl Marx and the greater conspiracy that Marx was only one part of, which was once known as the Order of Illuminati.  

J. Edgar Hoover once said that communists are the “masters of deceit” and wrote a book of the same title. In it, he said that recognizing communist trickery is one of the keys to thwarting communism. He explained: 

“Communism is at war with America. The United States is a vast battlefield. A school, a labor union, a civic group, a government official, a private citizen — all are important in the never-ending struggle for power. 

“The whole nation, to the communists, is a gigantic checker- board. The communist high command is constantly moving, jumping, switching, and retreating to get communist members in positions of influence. They are outnumbered; they know that. That is why they must depend on skill, maneuvering, and deception. . . . 

“The strength of this inner circle, the real backbone of communist striking power, lies not in numbers but in organized deception. Following Lenin’s teachings, the Party is a small, compact, and highly mobile group that can strike quickly with great fury, often achieving objectives unwarranted by its numbers. Today’s membership is hard, well trained, and disciplined. The weak, fainthearted, and skeptical have been purged. Those who remain faithful to the Party are dedicated to the communist revolution” (Hoover, Masters of Deceit, 95, 97). 

Join my Gab group World War Truth here: https://gab.com/groups/66508

Organized deception, organized crime, organized evil – that’s what faces us. We have no united front against communism. We are disorganized and the communists take advantage of our lethargy, divisions, and ignorance to push us around and prompt us to destroy each other. Hijacking our language, and, thus, our minds, was crucial in this process. The communists could have never gained such stunning success without first having tapped into and manipulated our minds and psyches. They did it by gradually changing our language, by using media to make certain terms and ideas taboo, and by smearing all opposition with the absurd labels noted earlier. 

The brainwashing (a Chinese term for communist indoctrination) of our population has been wildly successful, though millions of us are still grounded in truth and have the gift of discernment. A large section of our country, however, has been so propagandized that they now believe sex and gender are social constructs! 

Earlier this month, Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary changed part of their definition of “female” to read: “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.” Now, gender isn’t grounded in reality, biology, or science, it’s whatever you want it to be. Remember, “you can be whatever you want to be” – just as long as whatever fantasy you’ve concocted for yourself doesn’t lead you to oppose the relentless assault on Faith, Family, and Freedom by the communist conspiracy

Choose to dissent from the crowd. Rise above the smears by ignoring them or embracing them. Let them call you a “Nazi” or a “racist” or an “extremist”; what does it matter what a communist calls you? These criminals have wrecked our nation and world, destroyed the global economy, set loose plagues and pushed vaccine genocide, have broken up our families, have snapped the American mind with lies and deceit, and are now trying to disarm us so they can unleash an orgy of death, destruction, and misery that will surpass the darkest days of the Soviet Union or Maoist China. Now is the time to heed John Adams’ plea: 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write. Let every order and degree among the people rouse their attention and animate their resolution. Let them all become attentive to the grounds and principles of government, ecclesiastical and civil. Let us study the law of nature; search into the spirit of the British constitution; read the histories of ancient ages; contemplate the great examples of Greece and Rome; set before us the conduct of our own British ancestors, who have defended for us the inherent rights of mankind against foreign and domestic tyrants and usurpers, against arbitrary kings and cruel priests, in short, against the gates of earth and hell. . . .  

“In a word, let every sluice of knowledge be opened and set a-flowing” (John Adams, “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” 1765). 

When we open the spigots of knowledge, learning, refinement, and education, we place ourselves in a position to effectively and articulately resist tyranny, to see through the fog of war, to discern between fact and fiction, and to persuade others to reject error and stand for truth boldly in the face of criticism. Let us be men of deep learning, sound principles, and moral rectitude. Let us pierce the web of lies and seize the truth. Let us win this war of words that we may win the battle for the American mind and, thus, effect another American Revolution that will open a golden age for humanity. 

Zack Strong, 
July 23, 2022

The Greatest Battle in the History of the World

On June 22, 1941, the greatest military undertaking in world history began. On that awesome day, the liberating forces of the Third Reich fired the first salvo against the communist world conspiracy and its base of operations in occupied Soviet Russia. The strike was a preemptive attack against Joseph Stalin’s gargantuan Red Army which was amassed on the border and preparing to invade and subjugate all of mainland Europe. 

Though ultimately unsuccessful, this epic military strike, known as Operation Barbarossa, was, to date, the world’s worthiest attempt at ridding mankind of the communist cancer. Today, I pay tribute to the Third Reich’s armed forces – the most multicultural and international fighting force ever assembled – that invaded the Satanic Soviet Union and attempted to liberate Europe. 

Before I get started, and before you jump to too many wrong conclusions about how I’m a “conspiracy theorist” or a “Nazi sympathizer,” I want to share some of the relevant sources I’ve gleaned information from over the years and which I recommend to you: 

  • Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War? by Viktor Suvorov 
  • Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II by Viktor Suvorov 
  • Stalin’s War of Extermination by Joachim Hoffmann 
  • 1939 – The War that Had Man Fathers by Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof 
  • The Myth of German Villainy by Benton L. Bradberry 
  • The Artist Within the Warlord: An Adolf Hitler You’ve Never Known edited by Carolyn Yeager and Wilhelm Kriessman 
  • Hitler’s Revolution: Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs by Richard Tedor 
  • Mein Side of the Story: Key World War II Addresses of Adolf Hitler edited by M.S. King 
  • The Bad War: The Truth Never Taught about World War 2 by M.S. King 
  • The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS Volunteer, 1941-1945 by Leon Degrelle 
  • The Ruling Elite: Death, Destruction, and Domination by Deanna Spingola 
  • Witness to History series by Mike Walsh 
  • The Origins of The Second World War by A.J.P. Taylor 
  • Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 by Thomas Goodrich 
  • Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World by Pat Buchanan 
  • The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 by Richard Steigmann-Gall 
  • The Nameless War by Captain Ramsay 
  • Hitler: Democrat by Leon Degrelle 
  • Who started World War II? Truth for a War-Torn World by Udo Walendy 
  • How Britain Initiated Both World Wars by Nick Kollerstrom 
  • Stalin’s War: A New History of World War II by Sean McMeekin 
  • Communism in Germany: The Truth About the Communist Conspiracy on the Eve of the National Revolution by Adolf Ehrt 
  • What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933-1940 by Friedrich Stieve 
  • Institute for Historical Review – ihr.org 
  • Society for Dissemination of Historical Fact – sdh-fact.com 
  • The Barnes Review – barnesreview.org 
  • The Impartial Truth – impartialtruth.com 
  • “Hitler’s War: What the Historians Neglect to Mention” – Documentary 
  • “The Greatest Story Never Told” – thegreateststorynevertold.tv 

Many other sources could be listed, but you get the point: I haven’t just pulled my ideas out of thin air. They are grounded in fact, are backed up by tangible evidence, or are logical deductions from my perspective as one who has done deep study on world conspiracy, who has lived in Russia, and who has intensely examined both sides of World War II for some twenty-five years. If you are concerned with something I have written, send me a message and I’ll show you where to find the pertinent information. 

Now, on to the main event. On June 22nd, eighty-one years ago, Europe was imperiled by the Soviet Union. On September 3, 1939, because of Germany’s attack on Poland incited by Poland’s slaughter and abuse of thousands of ethnic Germans on “Polish” territory stolen in the Versailles Treaty, Britain and France had declared war on Germany and French forces had marched into and occupied a small section of German territory. In 1940, Hitler retaliated. As all of this was happening, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was licking his chops in the Kremlin and building up his army for a surprise attack on Europe’s backside. 

Stalin invaded Poland in mid-September, 1939. He next invaded Finland in late 1939. He took over the Baltics in 1940 and marched into Bessarabia and Bukovina the same year. Communist agents fomented revolutions and coups throughout the Balkans, used moles (Harry Hopkins, Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, et al.) to manipulate FDR and maneuver the United States into war with Japan and, thus, Germany, and generally added fuel to the fires raging in Europe and Asia. Between September 1939 and June 1941, while actually invading nations and moving the Soviet border closer to Western Europe, Red Army troops and supplies were being massed and staged near the German-Soviet border in Poland. 

The scale of the Soviet buildup was staggering. Never has a nation amassed so much armor, so many soldiers, so many paratroopers, and so many weapons. This unprecedented buildup along the border wasn’t for defense; that’s preposterous! Soviet intelligence Viktor Suvorov has thoroughly debunked the myth that the Soviet Union was staged in defensive positions. He proves conclusively in his books Icebreaker and Chief Culprit that Stalin was preparing to attack, that the Red Army was lined up in attack formation, and that the invasion was perhaps as little as two weeks from commencing when Hitler thankfully preempted it. 

In chapter nine of Icebreaker, titled “Why the Security Zone was Dismantled on the Eve of War,” Suvorov explained how the Soviets had torn down their defenses and erected means for a rapid offensive in the West when they were preempted on June 22, 1941: 

“A country which is preparing its defence deploys its army deep inside its own territory, and not on its very frontier. The object is to prevent the enemy from destroying the main defending forces with one surprise attack. A defending side will normally build a security zone in the frontier areas in plenty of time; a zone where the terrain has been saturated with traps, engineered defences, obstacles and minefields. The defending side will deliberately avoid constructing anything related to industry or transport in this zone; nor will it keep any heavy military formations or large quantities of supplies there. On the contrary, timely preparations will have been made to blow up all bridges, tunnels and roads in this zone. 

“Once inside the security zone, the aggressor loses speed of movement, and his troops sustain losses before they even encounter the main forces of the defender. . . . 

“In the autumn of 1939, the Soviet Union had a great stroke of luck. Under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, it annexed new territories between 200 and 300 kilometres deep. The security zone that had already been set up thus grew considerably in depth. Nature herself could have created these new territories for the express purpose of equipping it as a security zone. They had forests, hills, bogs, deep rivers with marshy banks and, in the western Ukraine, fast-flowing mountain rivers between steep banks. In short ‘the terrain favoured defence and the creation of defence obstacles.’ (Marshal of the Soviet Union A. Eremenko, V Nachale Voiny, Moscow Nauka 1964, p. 71) As if that were not enough, the network of roads was still at a primitive stage of development. Of 6,696 miles of railway lines, only 2,008 had double tracks, but the capacity of even these was limited. It would have been quite easy, were the need to arise, to make these railway lines quite unusable. . . . 

“The element of surprise – so advantageous to the Germans in June 1941 – could have been reduced had the main Soviet forces been kept away from the actual frontiers. Empty territory, even without any technical defence installations, would have served as a security zone after its own fashion, by allowing the main forces time to get ready for action. But, according to the official Soviet account, 

““The armies . . . were to deploy directly along the state frontier . . . in spite of the fact that its geographical outline was entirely disadvantageous to defence. Even those security zones stipulated in our pre-war directives had not been technically prepared,” (htoriya Velikoi Otechestvennoi Voiny, Voenizdat 1961, Vol. 2, p. 49). . . . 

“The construction of railways was accompanied by the building of motor highways running directly to the frontier towns of Peremyshl’, Brest-Litovsk and Yavarov. When preparations are being made for a defensive war, ‘belt’ roads are built running parallel with the front, so that troops may be moved from passive sectors to those under threat. These ‘belt’ roads are built deep in the rear; the frontier regions themselves are left as far as possible without roads or bridges. But the Red Army built both railways and motor highways running from east to west, directly to the front. This is done when preparations are being made to advance, so that reserves can be transferred rapidly from within the country to the state frontier, and so that the troops can subsequently be supplied when they have crossed the frontier. 

“‘The network of motor highways in western Byelorussia and the western Ukraine,’ recalls Marshal Zhukov, ‘was in a very bad condition. Many bridges were unable to bear the weight of medium tanks or artillery.’ (Vospominaniya i Razmyshleniya, p. 207) The situation should have delighted Zhukov: the supports of these rickety bridges could have been knocked down; anti-tank mines could have been laid on the banks, snipers posted in the undergrowth, and anti-tank guns put in place. Instead, Zhukov was furiously building roads, and replacing old bridges with new ones, so that tanks and artillery could use them. 

“The NKVD and Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria in person gave the Red Army enormous help in this mighty work. The term ‘the construction organizations of the NKVD’ is often encountered in Soviet sources. (Air Chief Marshal A. A. Novikov, V Nebe Leningrada, Nauka 1970, p. 65) But we now know whom the NKVD used as manpower. Why else were so many labour-camp prisoners held in the frontier zone, particularly on the eve of the war? . . . . 

“On the eve of the war, the Soviet railway troops did not prepare the rails for removal or demolition. They did not transport their supplies away from the frontier zones. On the contrary, they stockpiled rails, collapsible bridges, building material and coal in considerable quantities directly on the frontier. It was right there that the German Army captured all these stocks. German documents give evidence of this, as indeed do Soviet sources. Starinov, who was head of the Department for Defence Obstacles and Mining in the Engineering Directorate of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army, described the Brest-Litovsk frontier railway station on 21 June 1941. ‘Near the railway tracks,’ he wrote, ‘the sun shone down upon mountains of coal and heaps of brand-new rails beside the tracks. The rails sparkled in the sunshine. Everything breathed tranquillity.’ (Miny Zhdut Svoego Chasa, p. 190). . . . 

“Practically all the Soviet engineering and railway troops were gathered on the western frontiers. Sapper units and units belonging to those divisions, corps and armies which were concentrated on the frontier itself, as well as other units from other formations which had begun to move up to the border, were all operating in the frontier zone before the war began. The Soviet sappers were busy 

““preparing the departure positions from which the offensive would begin; laying down roads for columns to move along; surmounting and erecting engineered defences, creating tactical and strategic camouflage, ensuring that the infantry and tanks which formed part of the assault groups interacted properly; protecting forced river crossings . . .” (Sovietskie Vooruzhennye Sily, Voenizdat 1978, p. 255) 

“Let not the words ‘erecting engineered defences’ mislead the reader. By the time that the decisive attack on the Finnish Mannerheim Line began, Soviet sappers had also built several sectors consisting of engineered defence obstacles similar to the Finnish ones. Before going into battle, the newly arrived Soviet troops were put through these defences, which had been put there for training purposes. After that, they went over to the real attack. 

“With all due respect to the German Army, it must be admitted that it was catastrophically unprepared for a serious war. The impression is given that the German General Staff simply did not know that winter occurs on occasions in Russia, or that the roads were somewhat different from German ones. The oil used to lubricate German weapons congealed in the intense cold, and consequently they did not work. The German Blitzkrieg was unable to move with the same rapidity over Russian roads as it had over French ones. Hitler knew that he had to make war in Russia; if German industry was producing arms which were only suitable for use in Western Europe and Africa, who can say that Germany was ready for war with the USSR? 

“Hitler was lucky, however: Zhukov, Meretskov and Beria had obligingly compensated for the defects in German military planning by building roads and laying down great stockpiles of rails, collapsible bridges and building materials just where the enemy could capture them. What would have happened to Hitler’s army had a powerful programme of self-defence been put into effect, with bridges blown up, rolling stock and rails evacuated, all stores destroyed and the roads wrecked, flooded, turned into marshes and mined? The German Blitzkrieg would have skidded to a halt long before it reached Moscow. 

“It was not, of course, for Hitler’s benefit that Meretskov, Zhukov and Beria had built roads and railways and stockpiled supplies. It was to let the Soviet ‘liberation’ army loose on Europe, with speed and with nothing in its path, and to keep it supplied in the course of its surprise offensive. On the eve of the war, no one in the Red Army was thinking about defensive obstacles. Everyone had his mind on overcoming such obstacles on enemy territory. That is why, under cover of a TASS announcement of 13 June 1939, some Soviet marshals and leading experts on obstacle clearing made their secret appearance on the western frontier.  

“Marshal of the Soviet Union G. Kulik, who had secretly arrived in Byelorussia, discussed the situation with Colonel Starinov. ‘Let’s have mine-detectors, sappers and trawl equipment!’ he demanded (Miny Zhdut Svoego Chasa, p. 179) The Marshal was thinking about German territory. All the mines on Soviet territory had already been rendered harmless, and all the obstacles dismantled. ‘You have not named your branch correctly,’ the Marshal went on to tell him. ‘To be in accordance with our doctrine you should call it the branch for the clearance of obstacles and mines. Once we would have thought otherwise, and harped on defence, defence . . . but enough of that!’ (Ibid, quoted by Starinov) The same problem worried General of the Army Dimitri Grigoryevich Pavlov, the commander of the Special Western Military District. He noted angrily that insufficient attention was being paid to obstacle removal. The Red Army had learnt from its experience in the Finnish security zone, and was carefully preparing itself to surmount the German defences. If only the Soviet marshals had known that the war would begin for them on 21 June, and not as planned in July, then no resources for dismantling mines would have been needed at all. 

“The German Army broke its own rules and did exactly the same thing. It removed the mines, razed the defences to the ground and concentrated its troops directly on a frontier which had no defensive zone whatever. At the beginning of June, German troops began to remove the barbed wire from the frontier. Marshal of the Soviet Union Kirill Sirnionovich Moskalenko considered this incontrovertible evidence that they would soon begin an aggression. (Ha Yugo-Zapadnom Napravleny, Nauka 1960, p. 24) 

“But of course the Red Army did the same thing very shortly afterwards. The full flower of military engineering thought, including Professor Dimitri Mikhailovich Karbyshev – then a lieutenant-general of engineering troops — came from Moscow to meet on the western frontier. As he left Moscow at the beginning of June, he told his friends that the war had already begun and arranged to meet them in the ‘place of victory.’ Once he had arrived on the western frontier, he became feverishly busy. He attended exercises in fording water-defence obstacles, and in surmounting anti-tank obstacles with the latest T-34 tanks, neither of which are needed in defensive warfare. On 21 June, he went over to the 10th Army. But ‘before this,’ his biographer tells us, ‘Karbyshev, accompanied by V. I. Kuznetsov, officer commanding the 3rd Army and Colonel N. A. Ivanov, commandant of the Grodnensk UR [Ukreplyonnyi Raion – fortified region] visited the frontier detachment. On the Augustow-Seino road along the frontier, our barbed-wire entanglements were still in place in the morning, but by the time they passed them again on their return journey, the barriers appeared to have been removed.’ (E. Reshin, General Karbyshev, Izd. DOSAAF 1971, p. 204) 

“Interestingly, neither the officer commanding the 3rd Army, who had to wage war there, nor the commandant of the fortified zone which in theory was intended for defence, nor the most senior expert from Moscow, who knew that the war had already begun, reacted in the slightest to these measures. On the contrary, the removal of the obstacles coincided with their visit. 

“Can we imagine the commander of a Soviet frontier sub-unit, an NKVD lieutenant, removing the barbed wire on his own volition? If he were to give such an order, would not his subordinates regard the order as ‘clearly criminal’? The lieutenant did give such an order, though, and his subordinates carried it out at the gallop; evidently an order had been received from Lieutenant-General I. A. Bogdanov, the head of the NKVD frontier troops in Byelorussia. Bogdanov clearly realized that war was approaching; on 18 June he took the decision to evacuate the families of servicemen. (Dozornye Zapadnykh Rubezhei, Izd. Polit Literatury Ukrainy, Kiev 1972, p. 101) 

“It is hardly possible that Bogdanov could have decided to evacuate frontier troops’ families and, at the same time, to cut the wire, without the knowledge of Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria, the People’s Commissar of Internal Affairs and General Commissar for State Security. It is hardly possible that Beria could have made this decision by himself either. Nor did he do so. Beria worked in full co-operation with Zhukov. Above them, Stalin must have co-ordinated the actions of the army and the NKVD. The military and the Chekists were acting in coordination. What is more, they were all in full agreement on essentials, on places and on times. 

“We are assured that the Red Army suffered its first defeats because it was unprepared for war. This is nonsense. If it had not prepared itself for war, then the barbed wire would have been left intact, if only on the frontier. This would at least have gained a little time for the army sub-units to bring their weaponry to readiness, and may have averted the fearful catastrophes that followed. 

“The Chekists certainly did not remove the barbed wire on the frontier in order to allow the German Army to take advantage of the gaps they had opened up. The barbed wire was taken away for other purposes. Try to imagine a situation where, for whatever reason, the German assault had been delayed. What would the Chekists on the frontier have done? Would they have eliminated the frontier barriers, kept the frontier open, and begun again to erect defensive obstacles? Certainly not. There can be only one alternative to this thesis. The Chekists cut the wire in order to allow the ‘liberation army’ to pass over the enemy’s territory, without hindrance, in exactly the same way as they had done before the ‘liberation’ of Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Bessarabia and Bukovina. Now Germany’s turn had come.” 

This is a lengthy and somewhat technical rundown of what to some may appear less obvious details pointing to a Soviet invasion. However, these crucial facts, added to all the other corroborating evidence, make an airtight case. I urge you to investigate Suvorov’s writings and those of other authors like Joachim Hoffmann and Sean McMeekin. I now provide more evidence as I explained it in the pages of my book A Century of Red

“Days after the non-aggression pact was announced, the Comintern was issued instructions from the highest communist authority. A portion of the Kremlin’s instructions stated that the agenda of the Comintern had not changed, and clarified that “the purpose of the Comintern is to bring about a world revolution.” The instructions explained that world revolution must be brought about through a “prolonged war, as expounded in the writings of Marx, Engels, and Lenin.” More to the point, it stated that a pact between the Soviet Union and England and France was fruitless because it would not lead to the outbreak of war. However, the Comintern was told that a pact with Germany in which the USSR feigned neutrality would allow Germany to “carry through with her plans.” Thus, the instructions concluded, the goal of the communist conspiracy was to “assist Germany in a sufficient degree so that she will begin a war and to take measures to insure that this war will drag on.” 

“Throughout 1939, the Soviet regime had been in covert communication with Britain and France. Britain and France had proposed to Stalin mutual assistance pacts aimed at destroying Germany. Stalin knew that Britain and France secretly planned on attacking Germany if Hitler invaded Poland (the wording of the proposed pacts was so vague that almost any action Hitler took anywhere in Europe could have been defined as an act of aggression, thus calling on the allied nations to strike). Whereas Hitler wagered that a pact with Stalin would prevent such a war, Stalin knew better. As always, he used his inside information to create the conditions that would best benefit the communist world revolution. 

“Though Hitler was becoming desperate enough to attempt an invasion without an agreement of Soviet neutrality, he fretted over pulling his nation into a major war. He repeatedly stated that, as a decorated veteran himself, he wanted nothing to do with another European war, and that he wanted to preserve his people from the ravages such a conflict would inflict. Hitler was smart enough to know that war would not benefit Germany. 

“Out of all the nations of Europe in 1939, the quickly rising German Reich had the most to lose. England and France likewise had little to gain, and, as history would prove, lost a great deal of their power because of the war. Stalin’s Soviet empire, on the other hand, had the most to gain by facilitating a European war. Thus, encouraging Germany to attack Poland, and facilitating with oil and supplies a continuance of the war against Britain and France that would result, became a major priority for the communists. 

“In a speech whose authenticity is often debated, but which fits the known details of the communist strategy precisely, and which is further supported by documents found in the Soviet archives in the 1990s, Stalin stood before the Politburo in Moscow on August 19th and revealed his plan for setting off war in Europe. Note the date. This speech took place four days before the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, and on the same day that Molotov invited Ribbentrop to Moscow for talks. 

“In this momentous speech, Stalin stated that if the USSR concluded a pact with Britain and France, Germany would stand down and seek a solution to the Polish problem through other means rather than war. He bluntly observed that a lack of war would be “dangerous” for the communist state. On the other hand, he said that if the Soviets signed a pact with Germany, Hitler would invade Poland and the intervention of Britain and France would be “unavoidable.” Stalin then said that if such a European war was initiated, the non-aggression pact would give the Soviet Union the opportunity to remain neutral and wait for the “opportune time . . . to enter the war.” 

“The dictator went on to say that peacetime is never good for communism. Specifically, he stated that in peace communism “is never strong enough . . . to seize power.” Only a major war, he argued, could bring about the avowed Bolshevik goal of world domination. 

“Additionally, Stalin said that in the event Germany was defeated in the upcoming war he intended to facilitate between her, Britain, and France, the Sovietization of Germany would be inevitable. He observed that if this communist takeover of Germany resulted from Germany’s quick defeat at the hands of Britain and France, these nations would intervene and prevent it. Thus, Stalin concluded, the Soviet Union’s goal was that “Germany should carry out the war as long as possible.” He repeated that it was “essential” that the war last as long as possible with neither side achieving victory. A third time he said that it was “in the interest of the USSR . . . that a war breaks out between the Reich and the capitalist Anglo-French bloc.” 

“Stalin observed that a war of this sort would weaken Britain and France, to say nothing of Germany. Why did Stalin want a weakened Europe? Why was it in his interest to have another continental war? The answer is so simple, and so ominous, that most historians refuse to acknowledge it. The reason Stalin wanted a war between the European powers was because he plotted to invade and communize Europe when he felt that they were too weak to put up effective resistance. 

“Thus, as Viktor Suvorov theorized, Stalin used Hitler as his “icebreaker” to smash Britain and France into pieces, and pave a path for the Soviet tanks to roll down, subjugating the whole of Europe. To quote Suvorov, Stalin’s cunning was “in knowing how to divide his adversaries and then knock their heads together.”” 

All of this is crucial because if you admit the idea that the mass-murdering, sadistic, Bolshevik warlord Joseph Stalin was on the verge of invading and occupying the whole of Europe, you can appreciate Hitler’s decision to strike first. Hitler is reported to have said in 1941: 

“If I see an opponent bringing a rifle to his shoulder, then I am not going to wait for him to pull the trigger. Instead, I am determined to pull it before he does.” 

I couldn’t agree with the principle more. If a thug on the street runs at you with a machete, you have every legitimate right to pull out your Glock and drop him before he gets within striking distance. That is defensive, not offensive. And so it was in June of ‘41. 

The visible part of the banner behind Hitler at his first landmark speech as Chancellor of Germany reads “Marxism must die.”

Whatever you may think of Hitler and the Third Reich, Stalin and the Soviet Union were unfathomably, unquestionably, irrefutably worse. It would have been an unmitigated, unparalleled disaster if Western Europe had fallen under Soviet domination. The only reason it did not is because Germany stood in the gap and spilled her blood to prevent it. I praise the international force, led by Germany, that combined to participate in the heroic assault against communism. 

When Hitler’s forces finally struck the Soviet leviathan, he issued a proclamation stating the reasons for the attack and recounting the history of the First World War and the intervening period up to that time. Among other points, he explained: 

“The German people have never had hostile feelings toward the peoples of Russia. During the last two decades, however, the Jewish-Bolshevist rulers in Moscow have attempted to set not only Germany, but all of Europe, aflame. Germany has never attempted to spread its National Socialist worldview to Russia. Rather, the Jewish-Bolshevist rulers in Moscow have constantly attempted to subject us and the other European peoples to their rule. They have attempted this not only intellectually, but above all through military means. 

“The results of their efforts, in every nation, were only chaos, misery, and starvation.” 

This is historically unimpeachable. The Bolsheviks were, on the whole, foreign-born Jews who followed in the footsteps of their prophet Karl Marx, a fellow Jew from a long line of rabbis. They were funded largely by Jewish bankers in the West. These ravenous Judeo-Bolsheviks used the Soviet apparatus to slaughter tens of millions of people throughout Asia and Eastern Europe and, in truth, the larger world. They promised paradise, but delivered hell on earth – rampant immorality, homosexuality, transgenderism, no-fault divorce, abortion-on-demand, destroyed families, eviscerated faith, drug use, plunder, famine, forced labor in the GULAG, slavery, fear, misery, rapine, and genocide. 

These horrors were spread from Russia to Ukraine, the Baltics, Spain, and beyond. Stalin’s agents had also attempted to overthrow the Weimar Republic of Germany, which was itself Marxist and one of the most horrendous examples of a failed and debauched state in recorded history. Luckily, Hitler came to power in 1933 and moved swiftly to stamp out these revolutionaries with their fire bombings, assassinations, lying newspapers, anti-German propaganda, and cultural degradation. The well-known book burnings were conducted to burn transgenderism, homosexuality, and Marxism generally, out of German culture. I would to God that we would have such a cultural awakening in America and move to shut down the smut theaters, libelous media outlets, and treasonous political parties like Hitler did! 

The communists are relentless, however. They never surrender – they either conquer or are crushed. Cockroaches don’t retreat because you become annoyed that they infest your house. They only disappear when you eradicate them. Hitler knew this and stepped forward to lead an international coalition to thwart the communist world revolution. 

“Death to Marxism”

In July 1936, for instance, when the Soviets and their agents started the Spanish Civil War and went on a rampage that left half a million Spaniards dead, Hitler came to the rescue and, with General Francisco Franco, preserved Spain from becoming a Bolshevik colony. In November of that year, Germany joined together with Japan in the Anti-Comintern Pact (Italy joined the Pact in 1937). 

The Comintern is short for Communist International and was the wing of the communist conspiracy directing all revolutionary activities throughout the globe. They were tasked with creating revolutions in every non-communist nation and bringing them into the Soviet fold. Germany and Japan knew this was a grave threat to humanity and moved to stop the advance of communism. Part of the Anti-Comintern Pact read: 

“The Imperial Government of Japan and the Government of Germany, 

“In cognizance of the fact that the object of the Communistic International (the so-called Komintern) is the disintegration of, and the commission of violence against, existing States by the exercise of all means at its command, 

“Believing that the toleration of interference by the Communistic International in the internal affairs of nations not only endangers their internal peace and social welfare, but threatens the general peace of the world, 

“Desiring to co-operate for defense against communistic disintegration, have agreed as follows.” 

Thereafter followed three articles in which Germany and Japan agreed to cooperate together and coordinate efforts of defense against international communist subversion and to work with other nations, like Spain, “whose internal peace is menaced by the disintegrating work of the Communistic International.” 

In 1941, it was not a smaller state like Spain that was threatened by Soviet expansion, but all of Europe. In the spirit of the Anti-Comintern Pact, Hitler moved against Bolshevik Russia. I continue quoting from Hitler’s war proclamation: 

“It was, therefore, difficult for me in August 1939 to send my minister to Moscow to attempt to work against Britain’s plans to encircle Germany. I did it only because of my sense of responsibility to the German people, above all in the hope of reaching a lasting understanding and perhaps avoiding the sacrifice that would otherwise be demanded of us. . . . 

“. . . even during our march into Poland, in violation of the treaty, the Soviet rulers suddenly claimed Lithuania. . . . 

“The victory on Poland, gained exclusively by German troops, gave me the occasion to extend a new offer of peace to the Western powers. It was rejected by the international and Jewish warmongers. . . . 

“. . . Russia justified its attempts to subject not only Finland, but also the Baltic states, by the sudden false and absurd claim that it was protecting them from a foreign threat, or that it was acting to prevent that threat. Only Germany could have been meant. No other power could enter the Baltic Sea, or wage war there. . . . 

“Consistent with the so-called friendship treaty, Germany removed its troops far from its eastern border in spring 1940. Russian forces were already moving in, and in numbers that could only be seen as a clear threat to Germany. 

“According to a statement by Molotov, there were already 22 Russian divisions in the Baltic states in spring 1940. 

“Although the Russian government always claimed that the troops were there at the request of the people who lived there, their purpose could only be seen as a demonstration aimed at Germany. 

“As our soldiers attacked French-British forces in the west, the extent of the Russian advance on our eastern front grew ever more threatening. 

“In August 1940, I concluded that, given the increasing number of powerful Bolshevist divisions, it was no longer in the interests of the Reich to leave the eastern provinces, so often devastated by war, unprotected. 

“. . . Both England and Soviet Russia wanted to prolong this war as long as possible in order to weaken all of Europe and plunge it into ever greater impotence. 

“Russia’s threatened attack on Rumania was intended not only to take over an important element in the economic life not only of Germany, but of Europe as whole, or at least to destroy it. . . . 

“The result was an increase in Soviet Russian activity against the Reich, above all the immediate beginning of efforts to subvert the new Rumanian state and an attempt to use propaganda to eliminate the Bulgarian government. 

“With the help of confused and immature people, the Rumanian Legion succeeded in organizing a coup that removed General Antonescu and plunged the nation into chaos. . . . 

“Immediately after this enterprise collapsed, there was a new increase in Russian troops along the German eastern border. Increasing numbers of tank and parachute divisions threatened the German border. The German army, and the German homeland, know that until a few weeks ago, there was not a single German tank or motorized division on our eastern border. 

“If anyone needed final proof of the carefully hidden coalition between England and Soviet Russia, the conflict in Yugoslavia provided it. While I was making a last attempt to keep peace in the Balkans, and in agreement with the Duce invited Yugoslavia to join the Three Power Pact, England and Soviet Russia organized a coup that toppled the government that was ready for such an agreement. 

“The German people can now be told that the Serbian coup against Germany was under both the English and Soviet Russian flags. Since we were silent, the Soviet Russian government went a step further. Not only did they organize a Putsch, but signed a treaty of friendship with their new lackeys a few days later that was intended to strengthen Serbia’s resistance to peace in the Balkans, and turn it against Germany. It was no platonic effort, either. 

“Moscow demanded that the Serbian army mobilize. 

“Since I still believed that it was better not to speak, the rulers of the Kremlin took a further step. 

“The German government now possesses documents that prove that, to bring Serbia into the battle, Russia promised to provide it with weapons, airplanes, ammunition, and other war material through Salonika. 

“That happened at almost the same moment that I was giving the Japanese Foreign Minister Dr. Matsuoka the advice to maintain good relations with Russia, in the hope of maintaining peace. 

“Only the rapid breakthrough of our incomparable divisions into Skopje and the capture of Salonika prevented the realization of this Soviet Russian-Anglo-Saxon plot. Serbian air force officers, however, fled to Russia and were immediately welcomed as allies. 

“Only the victory of the Axis powers in the Balkans frustrated the plan of involving Germany in battle in the southeast for months, allowing the Soviet Russian armies to complete their march and increase their readiness for action. Together with England, and with the hoped for American supplies, they would have been ready to strangle and defeat the German Reich and Italy. 

“Thus Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it! 

“They did all this while the powers in the Kremlin, to the very last minute, hypocritically attempted to favor peace and friendship, just as they had with Finland or Rumania. 

“I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a crime against the German people, against all Europe. 

“Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border, but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as if they are in control. 

“During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the German border and could only be repelled after a long battle. 

“Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s Bolshevist headquarters. 

“German people! 

“At this moment, an attack unprecedented in the history of the world in its extent and size has begun. With Finnish comrades, the victors of Narvik stand by the Arctic Sea. German divisions, under the command of the conqueror of Norway, together with the heroes of Finland’s freedom and their marshal, defend Finnish soil. On the Eastern Front, German formations extend from East Prussia to the Carpathians. From the banks of the Pruth River, from the lower Danube to the Black Sea, German and Romanian soldiers are united under state leader Antonescu. 

“The purpose of this front is no longer the protection of the individual nations, but rather the safety of Europe, and therefore the salvation of everyone. 

“I have therefore decided today once again to put the fate of Germany and the future of the German Reich and our people in the hands of our soldiers. 

“May God help us in this battle.” 

Dear reader, this is not the lying ranting of a madman, but historical truth verifiable by anyone with the intellectual honesty to do the leg work. This is the real history. This is why Hitler preemptively invaded the Soviet Union; not for “living space” or imperialist ambition, but to save Europe from communist conquest. 

In October 1941, Hitler made another address concerning the war in Soviet Russia. It was one of the most memorable speeches he ever gave. He spelled out the struggle thus: 

“This was the most difficult decision of my whole life for every such step opened up the gate behind which secrets are hidden so that posterity will know how it came about and how it happened. Thus one can only rely on one’s conscience, the confidence of one’s people, one’s own weapons and what one asks of the Almighty. Not that He supports inaction but He blesses him who is himself ready and willing to fight and make sacrifices for his existence. 

“On June 22, in the morning, the greatest battle in the history of the world started. Since then something like three and a half months have elapsed and here I say this: 

“Everything since then has proceeded according to plan. During the whole period the initiative has not been taken even for a second out of the hand of our leadership. Up to the present day every action has developed just as much according to plan as formerly in the east against Poland and then against the west and finally against the Balkans. 

“But I must say one thing at this point: We have not been wrong in our plans. We have also not been mistaken about the efficiency and bravery of the German soldier. Nor have we been mistaken about the quality of our weapons. 

“We have not been mistaken about the smooth working of the whole organization at the front and extending over a gigantic area in the rear. Neither have we been mistaken about the German homeland. 

“We have, however, been mistaken about one thing. We had no idea how gigantic the preparations of this enemy were against Germany and Europe and how immeasurably great was the danger, how by the skin of our teeth we have escaped the destruction not only of Germany but also of Europe. . . . 

“Her power had been assembled against Europe, of which unfortunately most had no idea and many even today have no idea. This would have been a second storm of Ghengis Khan. That this danger was averted we owe in the first place to the bravery, endurance and sacrifice of the German soldiers and also the sacrifice of those who marched with us. 

“For the first time something like a European awakening passed through this continent. In the north, Finland is fighting, a true nation of heroes, for in her wide spaces she relies on her own strength, her bravery and tenacity. 

“In the south, Rumania is fighting. It has recuperated with astonishing speed from one of the most difficult crises that may befall a country and the people are led by a man at once brave and quick at making decisions. 

“This embraces the whole width of this battlefield from the Arctic Ocean to the Black Sea. Our German soldiers are now fighting in these areas and with them in their ranks Finns, Italians, Hungarians, Rumanians, Slovaks, Croats and Spaniards are now going into battle. Belgians, Netherlanders, Danes, Norwegians and even Frenchmen have joined. . . . 

“They are fighting on a front of gigantic length, and against an enemy who, I must say, does not consist of human beings but of animals or beasts. We have seen now what Bolshevism can make of human beings. 

“We cannot bring to the people at home the pictures we have at our disposal. They are the most sinister that human brains can imagine The enemy is fighting with a bestial lust of blood on the one hand and out of cowardice and fear of his commissars on the other hand. 

“Our soldiers have come to know the land after twenty-five years of Bolshevist rule. Those who went there and, in their hearts or bodies, have something of a communistic outlook in the narrowest sense of the term, have returned cured of this idea. 

“The pictures of this paradise of workers and peasants as I have always described it will be confirmed by five or six million soldiers after the end of this war. They will be witnesses upon whom I can call. They have marched through the streets of this paradise. 

“It is a single armaments factory against Europe at the expense of the standard of living of the people. Our soldiers have won victories against this cruel, bestial opponent, against this opponent with the mighty armaments.” 

Hitler saw himself as Europe’s defender. He compared the Soviets to Genghis Khan, the Mongolian warlord who slaughtered his way to an expansive empire. This is a worthy comparison when you consider the brutal way that Khan and his Asiatic hordes hacked to pieces tens of millions of people, raped European women, and plundered the continent. This is precisely what the Soviet Union did in 1944-1945, which you can read about in gory, graphic, stomach-turning detail in Thomas Goodrich’s books Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 and Summer, 1945: Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate

It is also no exaggeration to call Soviet Russia “a single armaments factory against Europe.” The Bolshevik gangsters didn’t care about the Russian peasants. They used the people as expendable slave labor to build arms factories to produce weapons, tanks, and bombers. Behind closed doors, away from the prying eyes of the West, inside the barbed wire borders of the Soviet Empire, the Bolsheviks built up the most staggeringly large military in world history. They produced tens of thousands of tanks – no one knows the precise number – including what were then the best tanks in existence. They churned out rifles that still flood the world today. They produced revolutionary new weapons for waging wars of conquest in the name of the Marxist world revolution. 

In a private conversation that was secretly recorded between Hitler and the Finnish General Mannerheim in 1942, Hitler revealed that his armed forces had already destroyed 34,000 Soviet tanks. Can you even fathom that number? Today, the United States has 6,600 tanks, Russia has at least 12,000, China has around 6,000, and NATO, excluding the United States, has about 6,000. To put this into context, the combined number of tanks of NATO, the United States, Russia, and China in 2022, is still thousands less than the number produced by the Soviet Union before 1941. 

This huge arsenal of weapons was controlled by the world’s greatest mass-murderers up to that time – a cult of criminals who had literally sworn to overthrow and conquer every nation on earth by violent revolution. It was against this deadly war machine that the Germans waged mortal combat on behalf of Europe and the world. 

The Germans threw three million men, three thousand tanks, and nearly as many aircraft, into Operation Barbarossa. Because they caught the Red Army in their preparations for offensive warfare, the Red Army was ill-prepared to defend itself and was pushed back in epic defeat. Millions were captured or killed and the Germans raced across Poland, Belarus, and Soviet Russia. Many predicted a swift victory. However, at least two things went wrong: 1) The weather – especially the mud – bogged down German forces; and 2) American Lend-Lease aid started flooding in. 

Of the first point, famed Belgian politician and Waffen SS volunteer Leon Degrelle wrote: 

“Whoever does not understand the importance of mud in the Russian problem can not understand what took place for four years on the Eastern Front in Europe. The Russian mud is not only the wealth through which the steppe returns to life: it constitutes also a territorial defense more effective than even snow and ice. 

“It is still possible to triumph over the cold, to move ahead in 40 degree-below-zero weather. The Russian mud is sure of its sway. Nothing prevails over it, neither man nor matter. It dominates the steppes for several months out of the year. The autumn and the spring belong to it. And even in the summer months, when the fiery sun flattens out and cracks open the fields, cloudbursts flood them every three weeks. The mud is extraordinarily sticky because the soil is permeated with oily residues. The entire region is swimming in oil. The water does not flow, it stagnates; the dirt clings to the feet of man and beast. . . . 

“Our legion had arrived in the Ukraine just in time to fight-or more exactly to struggle-against that enemy. 

“A struggle without glory; an exhausting struggle; a struggle bewildering and disgusting, but one which gave courage to thousands of Soviet soldiers, thrown in all directions by the waves of German tanks which had roared through two or three weeks earlier. 

“At first they, like the French in June 1940, had believed that all was lost. Everything indicated it. They were afraid, so they went into hiding. Then the rains came. From the poplar groves and the thatched roofs of the isbas in which they’d hidden, the partisans could observe that those marvelous troops of the Reich, who had so much impressed them, were no longer invincible: their trucks were beaten, their tanks were beaten. They heard the drivers, powerless, swear at their engines. Motorcycle drivers unable to free their trapped machines wept with rage. Little by little, the fugitive Soviets regained their confidence. 

“Thus it was that the resistance sprang from the respite given by the mud, reinforced by the spectacle of the German Army’s vulnerability, unthinkable only weeks before, when its long armored columns gleamed in the sun. The mud was a weapon. The snow would be another. Stalin could count on these unexpected allies. Nothing else decisive would take place for six months. Six months of reprieve, after his shoulders had almost been pinned to the mat . . . . It would be enough, until May of 1942, to contain the forces of the Reich which, overwhelmed by the elements, wanted no more than to hibernate in peace. The partisans were already organizing behind the German divisions, harassing them like mosquitos in a swamp, striking quickly, leaving quickly, immediately after the sting. 

“We had dreamed of dazzling battles. Now we were to know the real war, the war against weariness, the war of the treacherous, sucking mire, of sickening living conditions, of endless marches, of nights of driving rain and howling winds” (Leon Degrelle, Campaign in Russia: The Waffen SS on the Eastern Front, 17-18). 

More than the Soviet forces stopped the Germans, mother nature did. The wastes of Russia did what Stalin’s army could not. It gave Stalin a chance to regroup and launch counterattacks. 

Concerning Lend-Lease, a program overseen by Soviet mole and FDR confidant Harry Hopkins, let me relay the opinion of a Red Army tanker I talked with in Ramenskoye, Russia in 2007. He gave it as his opinion that Russia would have lost the war without American aid, including U.S. tanks. This old man operated an American tank against the Germans and explained to me that American supplies saved Soviet Russia. 

This is difficult to dispute when you consider the massive quantity of supplies we gave to Russia and which Russia has never repaid. This deal with the Devil costing us billions of dollars, gave Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union, and assured a future global holocaust of communist destruction. One source explained how extensive Lend-Lease help to the Soviets was: 

“By the end of June 1944 the United States had sent to the Soviets under lend-lease more than 11,000 planes; over 6,000 tanks and tank destroyers; and 300,000 trucks and other military vehicles. 

“Many of the planes have been flown directly from the United States to the Soviet Union over the northern route via Alaska and Siberia, others were crated and shipped to the Persian Gulf, where they were assembled and flown into Russia. 

“We have also sent to the Soviets about 350 locomotives, 1,640 flat cars, and close to half a million tons of rails and accessories, axles, and wheels, all for the improvement of the railways feeding the Red armies on the Eastern Front. For the armies themselves we have sent miles of field telephone wire, thousands of telephones, and many thousands of tons of explosives. And we have also provided machine tools and other equipment to help the Russians manufacture their own planes, guns, shells, and bombs. 

“We have supplied our allies with large quantities of food. The Soviet Union alone has received some 3,000,000 tons.” 

It should cause shame and sadness to well up inside every American heart to know that our forefathers saved Stalin and the Soviet Union! This is a monstrous black mark on our legacy. It was a dastardly act. We sentenced millions to slavery and death because we involved ourselves in a fight that was not ours. We ensured the victory of communism and the Sovietizing of European culture and politics. We guaranteed that China would later turn Red, that terrorism would spread, that militant Islam would rise, that Russia would stand opposed to us with the most fearsome arsenal of nuclear weapons on the planet, and so on. All of these horrors came because we got involved and because we supported the wrong side. 

Had we either stayed out of the fight or leapt into the fray on Germany’s side and fought against the communists and helped save Europe, history would have been vastly different. German troops marched into battle with the slogan “God With Us” on their belt buckles. Their first act in liberated territory was to open Christian churches after years of brutal anti-Christian Soviet oppression. Hitler promised to restore autonomy to the nations when the war ended. They also promised to modernize the East and expand German-style Liberty with its emphasis on merit, its respect of families and God, its protection of private property, its hostility toward Masonry, corporatism, and Marxism, into those God-forsaken territories. They could have annihilated communism in Europe had we not interfered. The blame for the Cold War and all its horrors rests with us, our traitorous president FDR, and the complicit communist cronies in the Kremlin. 

I wish to quote from Leon Degrelle again. He sat in Belgium on June 22, 1941, going about his business as usual when he heard an announcement on the radio that changed his life forever. He recounted the story this way: 

“22 June 1941 began like all the beautiful Sundays of summer. I was absent-mindedly turning the dial of my radio, when suddenly some words brought me up short: the troops of the Third Reich had crossed the Euro- pean border of the USSR. 

“The campaign in Poland in 1939, the campaign in Norway, the campaign in the Netherlands, in Belgium and France in 1940, the campaign in Yugoslavia and in Greece in the spring of 1941 had only been preliminary operations or blunders. The real war, in which the future of Europe and of the world would be decided, had just begun. This was no longer a war over frontiers or interests. This was a war of religions. And, like all religious wars, it would be unrelenting. 

“Before engaging its tanks in the steppes, the Reich had resorted to evasion, like a watchful cat. 

“In 1939 National Socialist Germany was carrying out a program without precedent. It had rebuilt itself in the midst of such lightning bolts, in the thundering and blinding flashes of such cataclysms, that all Europe and all the world felt the tremors. If all his enemies to the West swooped down on the Rhineland and the Ruhr, and if, at the same time, the Soviets expanded toward East Prussia and Berlin, Hitler seriously risked strangulation. He liked to say, over and over, that Kaiser Wilhelm II had lost the First World War by not having succeeded in avoiding a war on two fronts. He was going to do better. But we were to see, one day, side by side, gawking at the ruins of the Reich Chancellery in Berlin, not only Scots and muzhiks, but Blacks from Harlem and Kirghiz tribesmen from the deserts of Asia. . . . 

“Stalin had, like Hitler, played very skillfully. He had every interest in let- ting the plutocratic democracies and National Socialism exhaust each other, for he was the enemy of both. The more virulently they sapped each other’s strength, the better Communism could in the final account facilitate its task. Stalin carried out his game with Asiatic cunning, the leader of an international gang, sure of his men. He could even ostensibly ally himself with the Third Reich: over the entire world, Communist discipline was absolute. 

“The effects of that extraordinary solidarity promptly made themselves felt. Britain and France had made it a world war after Hitler invaded Poland. When Stalin did the same thing 15 days later, no one in the Allied chancelleries took the risk of reacting.

“Thus the Soviet leader was able to stab a vacillating Poland in the back with complete impunity, and annex over a third of that unhappy country. Britain and France, so solicitous of Poland’s territorial integrity before, neglected to declare war on the USSR. 

“That moral and military abdication gave an unshakeable confidence to the Communist bands spread throughout Europe. The democracies were afraid of Stalin! They had recoiled before him! What had been intolerable from Hitler had been tolerated coming from the Soviets! 

“The “democracies” dispensed with morality, principle, and their own self-respect for fear of consolidating Stalin’s alliance with Germany. They feared also the sabotage which the Communist parties throughout Europe were preparing or had already carried out. As always a short-sighted self- interest had prevailed over all other considerations. 

“In reality, the alleged “just war” had lasted only fifteen days. From September of 1939, the Allies had only one idea: not to offend the USSR, to begin a reconciliation with Stalin, in spite of his aggression against their Polish allies. 

“Stalin was able to multiply his demands, to put an end to the independence of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, to snatch Bessarabia from the Rumanians. One single thing was important to the Allies: to enable the Russians to change sides. In less than two years, that would be achieved. . . . 

“The Nazi lemon had been squeezed dry. The hour had come to squeeze a second lemon: the democratic lemon. We know what kind of juice that lemon finally gave to the Soviets in 1945: the occupation of territories in- habited by two hundred million Europeans and Asians, the Red Army established in Thuringia, on the Elbe, at the gates of Luebeck, at Petsamo, in Manchuria, in Korea, in the Kurile Islands! 

“The Yugoslav turn-about, the stated claims of Molotov on the Balkans, the military preparations of the Soviets during the spring of 1941; all these left Hitler no doubt about the ambitions of the USSR. The longer he waited, the more likely he would be attacked. In order to concentrate his forces in the East, he temporarily abandoned his plan to invade England. He tried, by various means, to find a peaceful settlement to the conflict be- tween Germany and the United Kingdom. It was too late for that. The British were no longer disposed to cancel the match; once begun, it could no longer be stopped. . . . 

“England, isolated from Europe by the sea and with its principal riches scattered over distant lands, could not sense exactly the importance of the duel. It reacted by thinking more about its immediate interest— the relief of its island— than about what the fate of Europe would be were the Soviets one day victorious. 

“By contrast, for us— the peoples of the European continent— that struggle was a decisive struggle. 

“If National Socialist Germany triumphed, it would be the master, in the East, of a tremendous area for expansion, right on its border, tied to it directly by means of railroads, rivers and canals, open to its genius for organization and production. The Greater German Reich, in complete rebirth, endowed with a remarkable social structure, enriched by those fabulous lands, extending in one block from the North Sea to the Volga, would have such power, would have such force of attraction, would offer to the twenty peoples crowded onto the old continent such possibilities for progress that those territories would constitute the point of departure for the indispensable European federation, wished for by Napoleon, contemplated by Renan, sung of by Victor Hugo. 

“If, on the contrary, the Soviets prevailed, who in Europe would resist them once the enormous German bastion was dismantled? Poland, drained of its blood? The chaotic Balkans, submerged, decayed, occupied, tamed? A depopulated France, having only speeches to oppose two hundred million muzhiks and the Bolshevik ideology, swollen with its victory? Greece, Italy, talkative and charming, with their poor peoples, squatting in the sun like lizards? The jigsaw puzzle of the small European nations, the residues of a thousand years of civil war, each incapable of paying for more than a hundred tanks? The Soviets defeating the Reich— that would be Stalin mounting the body of a Europe which, its powers of resistance exhausted, was ready to be raped” (Degrelle, Campaign in Russia, 7-10). 

Europe was raped so brutally by the Soviets and their American and British allies that she has never recovered. Please fix this in your mind – it was not Hitler who raped Europe, it was Stalin, FDR, and the Allies. The Allies bombed millions to death, destroyed Europe’s cities from the air, plunged Europe into chaos and suffering, unleashed the horrors of death camps on the Rhine and gangrapes by the millions in the East, and obliterated the one Christian nation on the continent that was truly anti-Marxist, anti-Mason, anti-Satanism, and which had the capacity, character, and spirit the resist the Soviets. 

Operation Barbarossa, though it failed, preserved Europe for several additional years and ultimately prevented the total Soviet conquest of Europe all the way to the English Channel. Thank God for the Germans! Thank God for the numerous other European, Arab, African, and Asian volunteers – including over a million liberated Russians and 150,000 Jews – who joined the Third Reich’s armed attempt to rid Europe of Bolshevism. Thank God for Hitler’s strength to do the hard thing and fight the Dragon. 

If none of this sounds politically correct, good. Political correctness is a disease imported to America by the Soviets. The “history” you were taught by your history teacher in school is as fraudulent as “Oswald killed Kennedy,” “FDR didn’t know about Pearl Harbor in advance,” “the Twin Towers were brought down by jet fuel,” “Nixon was not a crook,” “Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman,” “Epstein killed himself,” “abortion is healthcare,” “two weeks to stop the spread,” “vaccines are safe and effective,” and “Joe Biden won the 2020 election.” 

Dear reader, the wrong side won World War II. I will stand by that statement until they put me in the ground. America’s involvement – brought about by FDR and his Soviet advisors – was unconstitutional, immoral, and evil. Germany was not the villain Jew-controlled Hollywood and Establishment-controlled media make her out to be. Hitler was not guilty of a fraction of the heinous lies heaped upon his name.  

You read those books I listed above. You do the leg work. You look up the sources. If you do, you will find that I have not lied and I am not deceived. Those who believe and parrot the Allied myths about World War II are grossly deceived and have, through their deception, been persuaded to demonize the only good guys in the fight and support the side that plunged the world in war and which still, at this very moment in world, has its bloody hands on the levers of financial, political, military, social, and religious power. 

The Illuminati-communist conspiracy birthed on May 1, 1776, spawned Bolshevism, Fabian Socialism, and the various isms that have raped, plundered, abused, enslaved, degraded, and savaged our world. They are the ones responsible for hoodwinking the peoples of the world through their control over media, Hollywood, academia, and schooling. They have robbed the wealth of nations and are the ones behind the inflationary crisis that will continue to spiral out of control. This “they” has a name – it is Satanic communism. 

Satanic communism is the ideology promulgated by the myriad organs of this conspiracy, including, but not limited to: The Council on Foreign Relations; the Trilateral Commission; the World Economic Forum; the United Nations; NATO; Club Bilderberg; the Club of Rome; the Committee of 300; the Black Nobility; the Order of Skull and Bones; Freemasonry; the Society of Jesus (Jesuits); the World Federalist Movement; the Theosophical Society; Share International; B’nai B’rith; the Anti-Defamation League; the Southern Poverty Law Center; Black Lives Matter; Alphabet Inc.; Open Society Foundations; the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; the Rockefeller Foundation; the Ford Foundation; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation; the Commonwealth of Independent States; Aspen Institute; the World Trade Organization; the International Monetary Fund; the Federal Reserve; the Bank of International Settlements; the New Development Bank; BlackRock; Kabbalism; and so on. 

Many of these damnable organizations would not exist today had Operation Barbarossa succeeded in 1941 and the others would be far less powerful. China would have been an American ally because the Soviet Union would not have been there to turn China Red. That one blessing alone would have markedly changed the world. As it was, millions of German bodies littered the Russian steppes, millions more rotted in bombed out cities at home, and the progress of a great nation was crushed simply because a cult of communist criminals seeks world control. 

Europeans, never forget the brave Germans who died to liberate you or to keep you free from Bolshevik bondage. Never forget their sacrifices on the hellish Eastern front fighting Stalin’s hordes. Never forget. 

June 29, 2022,
Zack Strong

Enough and to Spare

An insidious myth has been propagated throughout the world – the myth of overpopulation and the scarcity of earth’s resources. Both points of this monstrous myth are flagrantly false. The earth is not overpopulated and our planet’s resources are not finite. 

The website https://overpopulationisamyth.com/ debunks the overpopulation hokum through and through. I won’t rehash all of their terrific information. Suffice it to say, however, that overcrowding, not overpopulation, is the real problem. Cities are indeed overcrowded. For the life of me, I don’t understand the appeal of large cities with their corruption, concrete impersonality, decadence, smog, high prices, high crime, unbearable traffic, turmoil, and leftist politics. 

Yet, according to 2018 U.N. estimates, 55% of people worldwide live in cities. That number is expected to rise to 68% soon. In North America, 82% of people supposedly live in cities. 74% of Europeans do likewise. The number is 50% in Asia. 

People have lost their connection to the land and soil. They no longer know how to produce their own food or have their own homes and property. Instead, they’re dependent and nearly helpless, living in cities that can’t sustain themselves and in metropolises that can’t offer more than overcrowding, noise, commotion, rampant disease and crime and immorality, and learned helplessness. 

There is so much land available to live on and to farm! No one should be without. Yet, the problem is that people have willingly congregated in cities where there is no possibility of self-sufficiency and staying close to the soil. They’ve urbanized themselves. They became statistics when they joined the jumbled mass of city-dwellers. 

But why should everyone live in cities? There’s so much more space available. I often get pushback on technicalities from people, but a fact you can look up is that the world’s population could all live in Texas. The density wouldn’t be desirable, but they roughly could fit. Think, then, of how much land truly exists in this world of ours! 

So much for not having enough space. Let’s talk about resources. It’s common to say that earth’s resources are finite and that eventually they will run out. This is a malicious falsehood supported by no facts and spread by genocidal social engineers who are actively trying to vaccinate, sterilize, poison, and starve us into extinction. It’s the type of perverse thinking, drawing from pop culture, that led the Mad Titan Thanos to exterminate half of the universe in the name of making life better for the survivors. While Thanos may have said it’s “simple calculus,” his math and logic, to say nothing of morality, could not have been more incorrect.

Before his passing, Professor Julian L. Simon wrote

“And why do they believe that commodities will grow more scarce? For many people, the idea that resources are finite is at the source of this belief. But the idea of finiteness is a prejudice and it is not supported by available facts. 

“Incredible as it may seem, the term “finite” is not only inappropriate, it is downright misleading when applied to natural resources. The mathematical definition of “finite” is quite different from a useful economic definition. . . . 

“The first auto‐ engine parts made of silicon and carbon (water‐ pump seal rings) are being installed in Volkswagens. Engines could soon be made of silicon carbide, cutting weight and emissions in addition to replacing metals. 

“Palladium instead of platinum can now be used in auto‐ exhaust emission systems. Ceramics engineering is exploding with new knowledge, putting an end to past generations’ worries about running out of metals. 

“Organic plastics can now be blended with glass to yield a material as strong as concrete, but flexible and much lighter. And a feasible way to make heat‐ resistant plastics using gallium chloride has been found. Plastics are now made only from fossil fuels or the oils from plants grown in fields. But researchers have recently found ways to convert agricultural products, like potatoes and corn, into direct sources of plastics by inserting plastic‐ producing genes into them. 

“In light of these developments, concern about running out of commodities seems ever less sensible. Just as the number of points in a one‐ inch line can never be counted, the quantity of natural resources that might be available to us, and the quantity of services that they can give us, can never be known.” 

A prejudice not supported by facts is right! Consider oil, for instance. Will we ever run out? All the “experts” said we would – and many still say we will. Yet, amazingly, oil deposits that were once depleted have now refilled naturally! It’s as if the earth pumps it out in as high a quantity as we need it.  

Let’s be clear – there are no natural oil shortages. The earth has given us more than we can use. There is, though, a man-made agenda to shut down the global economy and turn humanity into serfs in a high-tech feudal system. The conspirators in this global plot have turned down, and sometimes off entirely, the oil spigots. 

Alaska could be producing unimaginably more oil than it currently does. What about the Keystone Pipeline shut down by Beijing Biden? What about the Gulf of Mexico where the oil deposits continue refilling themselves as if by magic? Venezuela, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Saudia Arabia, UAE, Nigeria, Russia, China, and other nations, are loaded with black gold. The world is gushing with oil and can’t possibly run out any time soon unless it is through deliberate tampering and greed. 

Beyond basic facts about the replenishing nature of earth’s resources, there’s another source I feel to turn to. Scoffers scoff, but truth is truth. In 1834, the Lord Jesus Christ gave a revelation wherein He shattered the myth that the earth has limited resources. He stated: 

“It is wisdom in me; therefore, a commandment I give unto you, that ye shall organize yourselves and appoint every man his stewardship; 

“That every man may give an account unto me of the stewardship which is appointed unto him. 

“For it is expedient that I, the Lord, should make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures. 

“I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, my very handiwork; and all things therein are mine. 

“And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine. 

“But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low. 

“For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves. 

“Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment” (Doctrine and Covenants 104:11-18). 

According to the Lord, the earth has “enough and to spare.” The earth is the Lord’s and it was built to sustain the Father’s children during their mortal tests. There was no galactic oversight. God didn’t forget to give us enough resources to live. Such an idea is preposterous. The truth is that “the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare.” 

What, then, causes starvation, thirst, homelessness, want, and need? The answer is simple: Unrighteousness. In the revelation just cited, the Savior said that all things must be done “in mine own way.” If we follow the Lord’s way, His Gospel, the “poor shall be exalted.” 

The Gospel of Jesus Christ works by changing people from the inside out. It doesn’t say, we’ll give you a new car and a great house, but, rather, it teaches you to be industrious and thrifty and faithful. It doesn’t offer welfare trucks driving the streets to hand out food; that’s the task of the individual Christian disciple who is inspired by His Savior’s example. It doesn’t dictate x amount of land for each person, but relies upon the goodness and compassion of people to share, help, and lift each other. 

Ezra Taft Benson once observed

“The Lord works from the inside out. The world works from the outside in. The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of people, and then they take themselves out of the slums. The world would mold men by changing their environment. Christ changes men, who then change their environment. The world would shape human behavior, but Christ can change human nature. . . . 

“Yes, Christ changes men, and changed men can change the world. 

“Men changed for Christ will be captained by Christ. Like Paul they will be asking, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” (Acts 9:6.) Peter stated, they will “follow his steps.” (1 Pet. 2:21.) John said they will “walk, even as he walked.” (1 Jn. 2:6.) 

“Finally, men captained by Christ will be consumed in Christ. To paraphrase President Harold B. Lee, they set fire in others because they are on fire.” 

The world’s resources may seem finite, but only because people lack the infinite love of Christ. There’s no reason that people in India and Africa – and some in our own homeland – need to die of hunger. Only a sin-sick world would allow that. Only wicked governments would put a cap on valuable resources, all in the name of “saving the environment,” while people perish as a result. Only corruption would criminalize free enterprise, individual ingenuity, and personal stewardship over resources, thus suffocating free will, personal charity, and an opportunity to serve. 

In the revelation above, the Lord spoke of every man being “accountable” and having a “stewardship” over earthly things. This is a reference to the sacred importance of personal property. The Lord’s system is not a utopian collectivist scheme. It doesn’t rely on government forcing people to share. It doesn’t take away private property, but is based upon it. 

The Lord’s system is called the “law of consecration.” To consecrate may be defined as “to make or declare sacred; set apart or dedicate to the service of a deity.” Under the Lord’s system, the individual voluntarily sets apart a portion of his surplus to the Lord’s Church and to his fellow members of this system. 

What he gives up is his choice. The bishop or authority can’t force him to consecrate more or less. Whatever the individual retains is his stewardship and he is accountable for it directly to God. This could be a large tract of land intended for farming. It could be the wise use of a talent God has given the person. Whatever it is, it’s an individual, not a collective, stewardship. Yet, there are collective dividends and the Church may help those who fall on hard times or who need extra help. 

In this sort of system, everyone’s needs are met. It’s all voluntary. Each family owns its own property or has its own stewardship. Each is autonomous, yet enjoys the benefits of unity and collective strength. The system incentivizes and rewards hard work. It allows for growth and ingenuity. It doesn’t shackle man’s innate cleverness or ability to innovate. Here, the individual and individual family matters and is not merely a cog in a collective machine ruled from on high. It’s a beautiful, inspired system! 

The Devil has counterfeited the Lord’s system, however. Incapable of ingenuity of his own, Satan twists and mauls what Jesus gives in its pristine manner. Instead of the law of consecration, Satan has offered us communism and socialism. The communists, atheists that they are, have in fact sometimes said that they are the true heirs of New Testament teachings. After all, don’t we read in Acts chapter 4: 

“And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 

“And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 

“Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 

“And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need” (Acts 4:32-35). 

Those of limited light and narrow understanding think this means that everyone gave up their right to own and manage their own property. Not so. They merely dedicated, or consecrated, everything they didn’t need for their own upkeep, to the Lord and to the support of their fellow believers. But, you say, what about Ananias and Sapphira? Didn’t God smite them for holding back their property? No. He enacted justice upon them for lying and for setting their hearts upon riches – the very thing that the Redeemer had taught was the root of all evil. 

The Lord is eager to give all of us a stewardship. He wants us to be accountable directly to Him. He wants us to have our Independence and our autonomy. He wants us to voluntarily show Him how little value we place on the material world and how much more we love Him and our fellow man. He wants to know what sacrifices we are willing to make – how much we’re willing to truly put on the altar of discipleship. 

This system of consecration is designed to enhance feelings of love and service and to make us more Christlike towards others. It’s designed to make us faithful to Him as little children are to their parents. It’s meant to raise the poor and lower the rich until all have their just needs and wants met. But this voluntary system only works when the Gospel of Christ has penetrated the heart and cleansed it of greed, unjust ambition, selfishness, vainglory, pride, and covetousness.

Worldly people will never implement it. Churches decked in gold will never inspire their followers to consecration. In a word, fake Christians can never achieve the Zion-like beauty of the consecrated life. The greatest need, therefore, is for society to repent and turn to Christ. Repentance is the only remedy we possess that can save us from ourselves. 

The Savior Jesus Christ stands with open arms to forgive and uplift, to cleanse and crown, both nations and individuals. And, before long, He will stand here again upon the earth and beckon all to live the law of consecration and enjoy the bounties of the earth He created. Truly, there’s enough and to spare in the earth and in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When we finally have enough and to spare of His love and goodness in our hearts, we will have enough and to spare of everything else. 

Zack Strong, 
March 23, 2022

More Russian Lies

On December 29, 2021, I published a 15,000-word article detailing some of the lies Russia has been telling about the disaster situation they caused in Ukraine. I honed in on three key facts; namely, that communism never fell in Russia and that the hardliners are still pursuing the same old agenda, that Russia is not surrounded by NATO, and that Russia is the aggressor. Today, I want to expand my analysis and cite several more of Russia’s deceptions that are hoodwinking people high and low in the West. 

First, I want to give a quick overview of the last eight years. In 2014, Russia backed a coup that deposed the Ukrainian president while pretending to support him – then blamed it on NATO. Using this as a pretext, Russian supporters in Donetsk and Luhansk – the region known as Donbass – declared independence. This was of course supported by Russian troops and mercenaries. Russian soldiers simultaneously stole Crimea, which Putin then annexed. Leonid Ragozin called the annexation a “masterclass in political manipulation,” stating: 

“Putin succeeded in using a revolution that could have spelt the end of his regime to his advantage by forcing Russia’s entire population into binge watching daily episodes of an endless series about Ukraine burning in hellfire.” 

The endless streaming of malicious propaganda against Ukraine continues today with Ukraine being depicted as an illegitimate vassal state of NATO or the United States – a state that is literally perpetuating “genocide,” a claim Putin has now made more than once and is using as a justification for Russian intervention in Ukraine. 

Going back to 2014, however, I would be remiss if I didn’t note that a total of 5% of Ukraine was stolen and placed under outright or de facto Russian control. Russia has since granted almost 1 million Ukrainians in these stolen territories Russian passports and citizenship, partially to convert the area in Russia proper and make claims of “defending” its people more tenable (which is the reason Russia has engaged in mass settler colonialism throughout its former satellites states) and partially to reverse bad demographic trends. As Ukraine has justly fought back against these Russian-supported separatists and their Kremlin controllers, some 14,000 people on both sides have perished. 

A few days ago, as alleged Ukrainian saboteurs were being caught crossing into Russia and a supposed bombing attempt was being thwarted by Luhansk authorities, the Russian Duma approved a proposal to recognize Luhansk and Donetsk as independent states. On February 21, Putin approved the proposal. One of the stunning things about this move is that Luhansk and Donetsk claim control over territory that they actually don’t control and which is controlled by Ukraine. What if Ukraine decides to exert its control over its own territory in these falsely claimed areas? Will Putin call this an “invasion” or “aggression” and go to war to “defend” the newly independent states? 

Perhaps the point is mute because as incredible as it is to steal a nation’s territory and then recognize the territories’ “independence,” the old KGB tactician took it a step farther. Immediately upon recognizing the so-called “independence” of Luhansk and Donetsk, Putin ordered Russian troops into the region to “maintain peace.” Is this how you treat an “independent” state, by occupying it with your soldiers? Can it truly be called “independent” when, on day one, a foreign military under the command of a foreign dictator enters and takes over? Hardly! 

This is conquest by any other name and I’m losing my mind watching Alex Jones, Jeff Rense, and others justifying this invasion. Now, because of these latest developments, any Ukrainian action against the separatists in what is rightfully Ukrainian territory will risk the chance of engaging Russian forces and igniting a larger war. If that happens, remember it was Vladimir Putin who made it so. Glenn Beck has a mostly-accurate segment from his show on this news which a follower of one of my Facebook pages sent to me this morning and which I commend to you. 

Numerous sources are now reporting 10,000 Russian troops have already entered Donbass, though reports are a little hazy. Whether boots are actually on the ground yet or not (they’ve been there for eight years in one form or another, so why wouldn’t be), the Red Tsar’s decree exists and will be acted upon sooner or later. KGB dictator Putin, after sending in troops, requested the Duma to grant him authorization to use military force outside of Russian territory.  

The false narrative that Russia is the “savior” has again been repeated and fortified by the events. And the gullible fools in the West remain oblivious to the fact that Russia has orchestrated this entire episode using classic Soviet tactics of subversion, deception, and manipulation. 

Now, let’s proceed with Russia’s lies about Ukraine and NATO and the tactics they’ve used to steal part of Ukraine for themselves. The first thing that comes to mind is Vladimir Putin’s fatalist, alarmist, and, frankly, psychotic, rhetoric. First, he has continuously lied about NATO aggression, expansionism, and threatening Russia’s borders. I’m no supporter of NATO, but I’m also not a friend of lies and distortions. I dispensed with this absurdity in my “Russia Lies” article mentioned earlier, but the fact of the matter is that the majority of states bordering Russia are not NATO members, including Ukraine.  

Another fact is that the only states bordering Russia that are in any way hostile and which also contain NATO forces are those, like Estonia, which invited NATO forces to be stationed there AFTER Russia engaged in hybrid-warfare against them. It’s essential you understand the old communist shtick of proclaiming innocence in all things while blaming the enemy for the exact same things you are in reality doing or planning to do. Trained in KGB subversion tactics, Russia plays the victim card masterfully. But Russia isn’t a victim of anything except its own communist regime’s tyranny and conquest ambitions. 

Since I’ve been closely studying Russia, not a year has gone by that some Russian leader or general hasn’t threatened NATO or the United States with nuclear war. It’s a sick compulsion. If anyone in the West ritualistically threatened Russia or China with nuclear war, we’d rightly call him a lunatic. Vladimir Putin is a lunatic. I cite but three examples of his nuclear rhetoric. 

Last week, while in France, Putin fumed at his audience, warning them how quickly he would drop atom bombs on their heads in the event of NATO interfering in Ukraine: 

“Do you understand it or not, that if Ukraine joins Nato and attempts to bring Crimea back by military means, the European countries will be automatically pulled into a war conflict with Russia? 

“Of course, Russia and Nato [military] potentials are incomparable. We understand it. But we also understand that Russia is one of the leading nuclear states. 

“There will be no winners, and you will be pulled into this conflict against your will.” 

“You won’t even have time to blink your eye when you execute Article 5.” 

Imagine if doddering Biden said he would strike third-party nations with nuclear weapons if any of their allies attacked, say, Canada. That’s essentially the situation. That’s what Putin is saying. If NATO dares to help a smaller nation who has been attacked by Russia defend itself against further Russian aggression, then Russia will drop nuclear weapons all over Europe. Think of how maniacally insane that is! 

But this isn’t the first, and I doubt it will be the last, time that Putin has made such threats. In 2018, he again played the victim card, but still managed to voice his willingness – in seconds – to order a nuclear strike: 

“Our strategy of nuclear weapons use doesn’t envision a preemptive strike. Our concept is a launch under attack. 

“Only when we become convinced that there is an incoming attack on the territory of Russia, and that happens within seconds, only after that we would launch a retaliatory strike.” 

It should be noted that the nation that fires nuclear missiles second will be in better shape than the one that fires first, nullifying any idea Putin may have intended to convey about Russia’s benevolence.   

Finally, in a 2014 military document, Russia made a statement that puts Putin’s threats – most of which I haven’t included here – in better context: 

“The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened.” 

Putin would be willing not only to launch missiles if missiles were headed for Russia, which is understandable, but he is formally, on paper, prepared to launch nukes even in a conventional war or “in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation.” It should be alarming, then, to hear Putin so frequently accuse NATO of aggression and of threatening Russia. 

What’s more, Putin has taken to accusing Ukraine of literal genocide in Donbass. He said that, in Russia’s analysis, what’s happening “constitutes genocide.” Apart from the larger and more obvious false claims of the Allies against Germany, search the Katyn Forest Massacre. For years, the massacre of 10,000 Polish officers was blamed on Germany. Germany denied it, but no one listened. Only later was it confirmed that the Russians had perpetrated the slaughter and then blamed it on Germany – the world Elites’ favorite scapegoat. 

Back to Russia and Ukraine. Using the claims of “genocide” and imminent invasion as a pretext, the Russian-backed rebel authority of Luhansk, Leonid Pasechnik, and of neighboring Donetsk, ordered an immediate evacuation of all residents to Russian territory and called all able-bodied man to arms. In my Red Alert newsletter of February 19, I said: “Perhaps he’s clearing the area for Russian armor and troops to occupy the area or make an offensive.” 

Two days later, my prediction came true as Putin ordered Russian military into the area to “maintain peace.” “Maintain peace,” in Putin speak, is the same as “normalize” in Soviet speak; that is, to put down all dissent and take control of an area. Russia loves to create pretexts to send in troops as “liberators.” Think of Afghanistan, Syria, Georgia, Crimea, Armenia, and so forth. The Soviets said it’s impossible for communists to be the aggressors because they’re always fighting the true oppressors of humanity – capitalists, Christians, etc. Russia is carrying forward the same ridiculous claims today. 

Tellingly, the evacuation order was pre-recorded on February 16, but released only February 18. In the video, they use the word “today,” though that is an apparent fabrication. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported: 

“Videos of Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine ordering an “emergency” evacuation posted on February 18 were actually filmed on February 16, an analysis by RFE/RL’s Russian Service of metadata from the messaging app Telegram shows. 

“In the video posted online and on Telegram on February 18, Denis Pushilin, the de-facto head of the separatist-occupied Donetsk region, claimed an increase in the number of Ukrainian military personnel and weapons along the line of contact. 

“He ordered the evacuation, claiming that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was soon to give an order to “invade the territory” of separatist-controlled areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk region. 

“A leader in the separatist-controlled Luhansk region issued a similar call based on similar claims. 

“An investigation by RFE/RL’s Russia Service shows that the videos were actually made on February 16, indicating that the sudden evacuation was actually preplanned.” 

Remember the United States warning of a Russian false-flag event? Could this be it? Russia and the separatists alike are claiming that Ukraine is currently shelling Donbass, committing “genocide,” and is preparing to invade. Recall and apply what I said about Putin blaming the enemy for the very things he’s doing or planning to do. 

Oleksiy Danilov, Ukraine’s top security chief, responded to the allegations simply: “There are no orders to liberate our territories by force.” I love that he said “our territories,” because the Donbass is rightfully Ukrainian sovereign territory which was broken off by Russia, which now uses any Ukrainian move in the area to claim “aggression” and “genocide.” 

In an interview with Dr. Lada L. Roslysky, the founder of the Black Trident Defense Group out of Kiev, Molly Gambhir of WION news asked about Russia’s claims that five Ukrainian saboteurs had been killed in a firefight while trying to sneak into Russia. She gave a great comment: 

“We’ve become quite cynical to these types of claims because they’re false claims. What is on the Ukrainian territory is the Russian armed forces. And Russian weaponry is already in Ukraine and they have been there for eight years. We are completely surrounded. And when we are listening to the Kremlin, we should always look into it like a reverse mirror: What the Kremlin claims is what the Kremlin is actually doing.” 

I’ve been saying the same thing for years. Communists are incapable of telling the truth. Even when they tell the truth, they lie – because they tell it out of context or to suit an agenda by which telling an unsavory truth will harm their geopolitical adversaries. Putin, the schooled KGB master he is, used these types of doublespeak and reverse reality tactics constantly. 

As noted above, Russia has now sent potentially 10,000 troops into Donbass. What I didn’t write then, because the situation is so fluid that it changes and updates every hour, is that the Russian Duma have now, only after the fact, unanimously approved Putin’s “request” to send troops into foreign territory. Such is the sham dictatorship posing as a “democracy” that is Russia. If you know anything about how Stalin ruled the Soviet Union by fiat, you see its shades in Putin’s Russia. 

One of the lies Putin has been peddling about the situation is that Ukraine is the aggressor and doesn’t want peace. What of the Minsk Accords? What of the Budapest Memorandum? What of Ukraine’s various peace proposals? Russia never followed either the Minsk Accords or Budapest Memorandum, so why should they play nice when Ukraine asks for peace? 

In “Russia Lies,” I talked about the Minsk Accords and the ways Russia has violated them from the beginning. But what of the Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994? In it, the United States, UK, and Russia pledged to “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and to refrain from force or violence. It also stripped Ukraine of its massive stockpile of nuclear weapons – its only real deterrent to Russian aggression. Sadly, Russia didn’t abide by the Budapest Memorandum just as it ignored the Minsk Accords. Ukraine’s claims against Russia are just and Russia’s claims are just . . . garbage. 

Part of Putin’s underlying motivation for invading Ukraine is the notion that Ukraine never really existed, but has always been part of Russia. Historically, this claim has legs, though it’s not so cut-and-dry. The name Russia originated in the name “Rus,” which was historically located in Ukraine. Ukraine, not modern Russia, was the birthplace of the Russian people, Russian Orthodoxy, etc. The center of power shifted, however, to Moscow. The state of “Ukraine” as we know it today only came into existence in 1991. Yet, Ukraine – especially Western Ukraine – is home to peoples who have always resented Russia and who speak a different language. Some of these are Cossacks who have always had a tense relationship with Russia. 

I share this truncated view of Ukrainian history to give context to a comment Putin made that gives us a bird’s eye view of his rationale. I quote from a surprisingly good Yahoo!News article

“In a speech announcing his decision, Putin said that “Ukraine for us is not just a neighboring country. It is an integral part of our own history, culture, spiritual space,” according to a translation provided by The New York Times. He also claimed that Ukraine has “never had a tradition of genuine statehood” and that “[m]odern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia, more precisely Bolshevik communist Russia,” according to Reuters. Therefore, Putin claimed, “decommunization” should have entailed the re-incorporation of Ukraine into Russia. “We are ready to show you what real decommunization means for Ukraine,” Putin said.” 

If Putin wants to “decommunize” something, he should start by ordering his military to remove the hammers and sickles from their equipment, by changing the music of Russia’s national anthem (which is the Soviet anthem tune and was handpicked by Putin), and then by resigning from the Russian government. He is, after all, a KGB mafioso. 

The rest of his comment is somewhat revealing in its implications. Ukraine wasn’t the only state created by Soviet Russia. The Baltic states were created by Russia. The “stans” were engineered by Russia, too. Extending Putin’s logic, does Russia, then, have a right to incorporate – whether by hook or cook – these now independent nations back into Russia? If Putin can simply dismiss Ukraine’s sovereignty and conquer their nation by saying Russia created them, then why can’t he do the same for Estonia or Tajikistan or Palestine (the PLO was created wholly by Soviet intelligence, and their current president, Mahmoud Abbas, was trained in Soviet Russia, as was Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat. Iran’s Ayatollah was KGB-trained, too, in case anyone was curious. So were the Iraqi Republican Guard, which became the leaders of ISIS). 

Putin’s logic is, of course, intellectually bankrupt. What kind of world would this be if any nation that ever created another nation could simply take it back and claim it as their own? Most of the geopolitical map of Africa, though preexisting in their various tribal entities, was drawn up by European states – France, England, Italy, etc. Does Putin think they should be able to take them back? They created their distinctive borders and nation-states, after all. 

Let’s pull this article back to reality. Here’s another Russian lie. Russia swore that its annual military drills in Belarus would end when scheduled (February 20) and that Russian troops would head home. When a limited number of Russian troops seemingly did go home, many in the West cheered and said NATO was wrong and Russia followed through on its word. They spoke too soon. 

It turns out that Russia’s “partial withdrawal” and ending of drills was a fiction. Belarus has announced that Russian troops will remain “indefinitely” in Belarus – to defend Belarus, of course. 30,000 are there now with a large amount of tanks, jets, and equipment. And, so, Russian troops are not only along Ukraine’s border, but are moving into the newly “independent” states in Donbass. 

Where are all the “conservatives” and media talking heads who cheered Putin’s integrity now? They’re making excuses, dodging reality, blaming NATO, or buying claims of “genocide” which, naturally, justify the “unexpected” change of plans. Can’t we finally admit Putin lied? And can’t we also acknowledge Russia’s contradictory claims – first there was no mass buildup up of troops, then the troops were being withdrawn? It’s one lie on top of another. 

Some are justifying everything that’s happened over the past eight years by the fact that, on the whole, the people of Donbass are happy to be either independent or Russian citizens. In a normal situation, I approve and applaud the right of self-determination. However, that’s not what happened here. None of this was organic. It was all orchestrated by the Kremlin. 

Let’s do a little comparison. If Chinese troops moved into San Francisco and occupied it, and the high Asian population there cheered, would that be justified? Would it be justified if the Asians there had a referendum and voted to become part of China? 

If that’s an absurd example, let’s use one closer to home. Much of the current Western United States was inhabited by Mexicans or Spanish-speakers before the territory fell into U.S. hands. Would they be justified, then, in passing referendums to join Mexico and break off from the United States? What if Mexican mercenaries or drug cartels entered Arizona, or Texas, or California, and sealed off a section of territory, declaring it to be independent and no longer under Washington’s control?  

Just for emphasis, let’s use a third example. Would the American Indians be justified in rising up to reclaim some of their lands? They already possess “nations” that aren’t really part of the United States. What if they decided they wanted some of their traditional lands back and sent out their braves to, by force of arms, cut off a slice of, say, Virginia. What if the people of that area agreed that the Indians should probably have that territory? What if they were even happy about it? Would that be justified? 

Would any of this be justified? Of course not! None of these are organic movements. Each example I’ve used employs force and compulsion. Such is the case in Ukraine. The people of Donbass, in a time of peace, didn’t simply vote to leave Ukraine. If they had, I’d support them. However, they were aided by foreign mercenaries and troops to force a separation. This separation has been contested by the power rightfully controlling that jurisdiction. 14,000 people have died as a result and war continues to rock the area. 

The foreign mercenaries and troops, of course, were Russians. They were sent there with the deliberate purpose of breaking off Donbass from the rest of Ukraine as part of a long-term strategy of consuming Ukraine piecemeal. Recall that Russia outright stole and annexed Crimea. In all, Russian troops aided local rebels in cutting off 5% of Ukraine’s total territory and enforcing the separation, later hastily voted on, at the point of the sword. None of this is justifiable. It’s invasion and conquest by any other name. And if it happened to us, we’d go to war and wouldn’t allow it. But when Ukraine fights back or dares raise any complaints about their illicitly stolen territory and population, stolen through force of arms by a foreign enemy, Russia accuses them of “genocide,” expansion, and aggression. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious and if so many gullible people weren’t going along with the narrative. 

The most disgustingly asinine and repugnant comment I’ve heard so far regarding Putin’s order to send troops into Ukraine was made on The American Journal radio show, a branch of InfoWars. Most of what Alex Jones and the various other co-hosts say is correct. However, just as they did in 2014, they’ve chosen the wrong side in the Ukraine situation. To wit, the imbecilic comment I refer to was made today, February 22, by Harrison Smith and said: 

“Thank God, thank God, somebody is standing up against the imperialist war hawks that now run this country and have occupied the American government. It’s not me. It’s not me they’re at war with, that Russia’s at war with. It’s not the American People that Russia’s at war with. It is the despicable and detestable cabal that runs our country. So, good riddance to them; good luck Russia. I don’t know, maybe, you know, when Texas breaks away, Russia will be there to declare us a sovereign state – a sovereign, breakaway, independent nation. I don’t know, it might be nice.” 

I’ve rarely heard anything so stupidly ignorant and so blatantly treasonous as this blather. I’d fire Harrison Smith immediately, if I were Alex Jones. The only thing despicable here is the idea that an American would welcome Russian troops into America. If Russian troops come into my community, it’s an act of war and I’ll open fire. I’m sick of Russian aggression, Russian hypocrisy, and Russian lies. We have enough of that in America – we don’t need to deal with it from a foreign, paganized, communist nation like by a KGB agent who has said the (fake) fall of the USSR is “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.” Click the hyperlink to watch a forty-two-minute presentation on my Liberty Wolf podcast about the fake fall of communism. It’s crucial to understand this deception. 

The final myth I want to bust is that Russia and Putin stand in opposition to the Western New World Order. This is utterly absurd. Let’s start with a fun fact. There’s been plenty of news, especially from the alternative media, about Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. Alex Jones, in particular, has been rightly ranting every day about the WEF’s admitted influence throughout the world and how numerous world leaders, such as Justin Trudeau are devotees and trainees of the WEF. What about Putin? Did you know that Vladimir Putin, the so-called savior from the new World Order, is a member of the World Economic Forum and Davos group and that he has been attending their forums for years? Surprised? 

In January 2021, Klaus Schwab personally introduced Dictator Putin for a speech at the Davos summit in Switzerland, eagerly stating: “Mr. President, the world is waiting to hear from you.” What did Putin say to the world? You can watch his address here and read the official transcript here. But here’s how Putin began: 

“I have been to Davos many times, attending the events organised by Mr. Schwab, even back in the 1990s. Klaus just recalled that we met in 1992. Indeed, during my time in St Petersburg, I visited this important forum many times. I would like to thank you for this opportunity today to convey my point of view to the expert community that gathers at this world-renowned platform thanks to the efforts of Mr. Schwab.” 

In the talk, Putin parroted the same propaganda we hear from our overlords here in the West. He played his part, bashing the United States, putting down free enterprise, and touting Russia’s great accomplishments for the world, but, if you pay attention, he also praised the World Bank, applauded the global COVID-19 response, pushed vaccines and called for a mass vaccination program in developing countries, called for international coordination to save the climate, referred to the hoax of “global warming” as a “critical problem” that required international “cooperation” to solve, and so forth. I don’t like the term “globalist,” but if anyone is a “globalist,” it is Putin. 

Isn’t it interesting that the ostensibly anti-New World Order Putin is so friendly with the very organs of world government and that he has so many decades of experience working with them? He considers them “experts” and is on a first-name basis with “Klaus.” If the Alex Joneses of society rip on Trudeau for being a WEF stooge, why don’t they also condemn Putin for being on the same side? To bash one but not the other for the very same connections is hypocrisy. 

Why would Putin be hobnobbing with Klaus Schwab – the architect of the Great Reset – and the world financial Elite that hold sway in the West if he was truly their enemy and opposed their agenda? Why would Putin be implementing WEF, Davos, and U.N. policies in Russia if he was opposed to this cabal? The fact is, of course, he’s playing for the same team. When will people understand that the cabal that threatens us is an international cabal and has its agents in every nation? 

A Breitbart headline from yesterday tells it all: “Russia Presides over U.N. Security Council Meeting on Russian Aggression.” The article states: 

“Ukraine requested an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) on Monday night in response to Russia’s military incursion. 

“The rotating presidency of the UNSC happens to be held by Russia at the moment.” 

Russia is ensconced in global governance. Communists are the true “globalists.” Their entire program, which Putin was trained in and adheres to, is internationalist and seeks world hegemony with its partner in crime, Red China. There’s no shady, underhanded, thieving, corrupt, conspiratorial, murderous, genocidal thing you can imagine that Russia – both in the Soviet era and today – haven’t engaged in. 

From abortion to transgenderism to political correctness to the psychopolitics of medicine to mass surveillance, most of the ills that plague the West first came from Russia. Trust me, as one who lived in Russia for two years and spent my time talking with average folks and observing, it is a crass, violent, and degenerate society. I talked about this at length in “Russia – Bastion of Traditionalism?” 

I’m of course speaking collectively and not individually; there are some great Russians with beautiful souls. But their parasitic system, which exists in the West, too, has left deep scars on Russian society and Russia has been used for a century as a base of operations against humanity. Those raised in this culture of communist corruption and perfidy are among the foremost of those who, though they are perpetrating horrors, are now seen, because of mass deception, as liberators, saviors, and heroes. 

Why would Putin allow this state of affairs to continue in his country if he was truly against it? Why wouldn’t he use his dictatorial powers and mass wealth to curb the corruption, stop the global disinformation campaigns, or stop his nation’s cyberattacks on other countries? Why did his operatives help the Democrats in their false “collusion” narrative against Donald Trump? Why would he send his people to arrest his political opposition or poison dissidents? Would an honest, Christian man, as Putin alleges he is, do these things? 

Putin has gone along with the Western Elite’s machinations at nearly every turn. He was the first to support George W. Bush’s “war on terror” after 9/11. He went along with COVID-19 scaremongering and locked his country down. He then mass-produced vaccines and delivered them all over the world. He supports the ludicrous “global warming” hoax. Russia has been a host of numerous transhumanist conferences and, in fact, is home to billionaire Dmitry Itskov’s “2045” project. These transhumanists plot to subjugate mankind and fuse us to machines in some sick mirror of the Matrix.  

Why would Putin allow these transhumanist conferences in his country if he was so opposed to their goals? Why would he participate with the World Economic Forum for thirty years? Why would he have assassinated dissidents, jailed his biggest political rival, and rigged elections if he was such a good statesman? Why would he have invaded and intervened in nations from Georgia to Ukraine to Armenia to Kazakhstan to Syria if he was such a peace-loving man?  

Is Vladimir Putin not smart enough to see the agenda of the transhumanists and world economic Elite? Is he to narrow-minded not to comprehend the great conspiracies swirling around him? Of course he knows their agenda! He’s part of the conspiracy! The only difference is that he wants to be the one leading it and doesn’t want to play second fiddle to anyone. 

These types of questions and observations could be made ad nauseum. The same questions could be asked of Putin’s closest ally, the Chinese dictator Xi Jinping. His Davos 2022 speech, which openly calls for more globalization, may be read here. All of these dictators, whether Putin in Moscow or Xi in Beijing or Biden in Washington or Trudeau in Ottawa, belong to the same clubs and share the same ideals. That they squabble about lesser things is tangential. None of them actually care about Ukraine. It’s a pawn in a larger scheme whose stakes are the world. But the game must be played the right way to fool the pawns and to get them to go along, for, without them, the Elite have no power. 

Most of the big names that dominate the news are Illuminati-communists or their puppets and belong to the same occult conspiracy. Whether in the East or the West, they’re Marxist-Leninists in principle and believe in the almighty state. They are the high priests of Lucifer and will, together, each playing his part, eventually damn humanity. 

Zack Strong 
February 23, 2022 

Russia Lies

*I wrote and published this article as installment number forty-three of my Red Alert Newsletter. Because I deem it of higher-than-usual importance, I have decided to share it here as well. I encourage you to visit Red Alert and consider subscribing. Wait until January, however, when I will be lowering the subscription price and changing up the format. Until then, please share this article and thank you for your support!*

You may call this article a rebuttal to the Russophiles out there and to the misguided pundits in our camp. Specifically, two weeks ago, I heard Alex Jones in one instance, and Jeff Rense and Mitchell Henderson in the other instance, say that Russia is the victim in the Ukraine debacle and that NATO is the one pushing us to war. This is sheer insanity and an inversion of reality!

To all those who see Russia as the picked-on, besieged, blameless little victim, please understand three facts: 1) The “collapse” of the Soviet Union was a strategic ruse, world communism is stronger than ever and is pursuing its age-old goal of world domination, and Russia and China are still spearheading the agenda on the ground; 2) Russia is not “surrounded” and hemmed in by NATO; and 3) Russia, not NATO, is the aggressor in Ukraine and started that conflict. 

1. The Contrived Collapse of Communism 

In 1989, the Berlin Wall was allowed to “fall.” The Kremlin gave orders to its agents in East Germany to open the borders and not stop people from crossing. They simply stood down. It was all on purpose; a stage production. 

In 1991, the Soviet regime once again stood down its forces, lowered the Soviet flag, and allowed the Soviet Union to change its name. It even faked a weak military coup in which we’re supposed to believe that the Soviet military and intelligence services were so inept that they couldn’t arrest Gorbachev or even Yeltsin, the latter standing up on a tank in public in a dramatic moment to denounce the “hardliners.” It was good acting in a well-crafted ruse. 

It was a contrived “collapse” – a psyop with few rivals in human history. It was precisely the type of big lie the West wanted to hear and which they eagerly gobbled up. Yet, political theater is not reality and wishful thinking doesn’t change the truth on the ground. And the truth is that the Soviets, which are part of a larger and ongoing conspiracy against mankind, pre-planned this “collapse” years in advance as part of a mass deception to lull the West into complacency in preparation for the final death blow. 

For more details and analysis of the fake “fall” of the Soviet Union, see the relevant chapters in my books A Century of Red and Red Gadiantons. Here, I want to touch upon just several of the compelling points against the “collapse” narrative. 

First, think of human nature and history. Where in the annals of history has a mighty, tyrannical regime ever given up its power without a struggle? Where have people who were entirely stripped of their Liberty ever regained their Freedom without bloodshed or an uprising? Cite me one example except for the Soviet “collapse” in 1991. You can’t do it. It’s never happened before and it will never happen. This is because of human nature and the near universal lust to dominate and control other people, wealth, and power. 

Yet, the controlled press, and the communist world, want us to believe that the impossible happened in 1991 – that the greatest mass-murdering oppressors in world history suddenly had a change of heart, relinquished their design of world domination, folded their sprawling system of psychological, espionage, and subversion operations, gave up their power and control over the world’s most fearsome stockpile of weapons, and restored Freedom and sovereignty to the Soviet peoples. If you believe that, I have a bridge on Jupiter to sell you! 

Why should we even be tempted to believe the communists suddenly changed their minds and beat their swords into ploughshares? Hadn’t the mass-murdering Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev said on September 17, 1955: “[I]f anyone believes that our smiles involve abandonment of the teaching of Marx, Engels, and Lenin, he deceives himself poorly. Those who wait for that must wait until a shrimp learns to whistle”? And hadn’t the early Soviet leaders foretold of a day when they’d stage a deception and show of peace in order to trick the West before the final victory? 

In 1930, Soviet bureaucrat Dmitri Z. Manuilsky told the students at the Lenin School of Political Warfare: 

“War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack. Our time will come in 20 to 30 years. To win, we shall need the element of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard-of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist.” 

Here you have a Soviet leaders openly speaking of a generational plan to simulate peace and make “unheard-of concessions,” all while preparing to deal the final death blow to the West. Lenin and others also spoke openly about the need to hoodwink the West into accepting, funding, and befriending Soviet Russia by pretending to be peace-loving and democratic. It’s all a lie, ladies and gentlemen! If you think the Soviet masterminds discarded their plan to fake “the most spectacular peace movement on record,” you’re a sucker and don’t know anything about how the world truly works. 

Feigning weakness while preparing to strike is an ageless tactic which the Soviets adopted and perfected. The Reds in both Russia and China have used the method to throw the off West, regroup, gain concessions (usually in the form of financing and trade), and prepare for further aggression. This is what the period of “Détente” during the Cold War was all about. This is what Mao did whenever his Chinese bandits began to lose ground to Chiang Kai-shek. While pretending to desire peace and sending envoys to engage in vain peace talks and sign agreements that he knew he would later break, he was busy regrouping, repositioning, rearming, and preparing for new offensives. Communists have used this stratagem ad nauseum. 

The Soviet defector, Anatoliy Golitsyn, an intelligence operative, warned the West that the Soviets used Détente as a ruse and that they were preparing an even greater performance to fool us – the “fall” of the Soviet Union. That’s right, Soviet intelligence agents like Golitsyn warned us years in advance of the fake “fall” of the Soviet Union. This is the second great evidence against its veracity. 

If Golitsyn was full of it, how did most of what he predicted on a range of topics come true? Why, if he was really as crazy as some say, did his prediction about the fraudulent “collapse” of the USSR come true? He wasn’t a dreamer; he was a truth-teller. And the truth is that the West has been conned again by the masters of deceit who have tricked us repeatedly. 

In his book New Lies for Old, Golitsyn essentially said the Soviet conspirators would deceive us by rebranding the Soviet Union the same way that Coke redesigns its cans and commercials yet still serves you the same disgusting poison purporting to be soda. The book must be read as a whole and quoting parts of it is insufficient. However, I’ve drawn out a several segments to give the flavor of his observations regarding Soviet strategic deception. Remember, you’re reading the personal witness of a former Soviet intelligence officer who knew whereof he spoke: 

“The launching of a strategic disinformation program in 1958 invalidated the conventional methodology of Western students of communist affairs. A carefully controlled flood of information was released through the whole range of sources under communist control. As in the NEP period in the 1920s, this flood of information confused and distorted Western views on the situation in the communist world. Western analysts, lacking the ability to acquire inside information on communist strategic thinking, planning, and methods of operation, gratefully accepted the new stream of information at face value. Without their knowing it, their conventional methods of analysis were invalidated and turned back on them by the communist strategists. Because of the deliberate projection by these strategists of a false image of the dissolution of communist unity, the noncommunist world ignored or undervalued open and significant evidence pointing to bloc cooperation from 1957 onward on a new footing of equality and commitment to fundamental ideological principles and long-term policy objectives. The new dispensation allows for variation in domestic and international tactics and provides unlimited opportunities for joint efforts between bloc countries to misrepresent the true state of relations between them whenever this should be to their mutual advantage. Unnoticed by the West, communist ideology was freed from its Stalinist straitjacket and revived on Leninist lines. The change was successfully misrepresented as the spontaneous replacement of ideology by nationalism as the driving force behind the communist world. 

“Noncommunist studies came increasingly to be based on information emanating from communist sources. While observers in the noncommunist world sometimes showed some awareness that information was reaching them through channels under communist control, there was virtually no recognition of the fact that the information had been specially prepared behind the Iron Curtain for their benefit. The political role of the intelligence services was ignored, and since the evidence of planning and coordination in the activities of the bloc was also overlooked, the growth of internal opposition movements and the eruption of disputes between communist states and parties were wrongly seen as spontaneous developments. 

“. . . The evidence of evolution and splits in the communist world was so overwhelming in volume and so convincing in character that none could continue to question its validity. Acceptance in particular of the Sino-Soviet split as a reality became the common basis for all noncommunist attempts to analyze present and future policies and trends in the communist world. As a result Western perception of offensive communist intentions was blunted and the evidence of coordination in the execution of worldwide communist strategies was discounted. 

“Because strategic disinformation was not recognized as such, Western views on internal developments in the communist world came increasingly to be shaped and determined by the communist strategists in the interests of their own long-range policy. In the Soviet Union the dropping of the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” and the introduction of market-orientated enterprises and other measures of economic reform seemed to presage a reversion toward capitalism. The gradual rise in living standards seemed to be taking the edge off the Soviet appetite for revolutionary change, generating new pressures on the regime to allow greater freedom and improve the supply of consumer goods. Apparent differences in the Soviet leadership between the liberal reformers and conservative ideologists on how to grapple with these pressures and reconcile the need for progress with lip service to ideology confirmed Western belief in the recurrence of power struggles, mainly behind the scenes but sometimes in the open, as in the case of Khrushchev’s dismissal. When the liberals appeared to have the upper hand, expectations were aroused of increasing cooperation between the Soviet Union and the West. Moderation in Soviet propaganda and expressions of interest in peaceful coexistence and businesslike negotiations seemed genuine, especially when compared with the implacable hostility of the Chinese. Occasional aggressive Soviet actions were attributable to the survival within the leadership of a group of die-hard Stalinists who had to be appeased from time to time by the liberal reformers. If the Stalinists were once more to regain control, detente would be reversed and there might be a Sino-Soviet reconciliation. The West therefore had an interest in strengthening the hand of liberal reformers. Provided they survived, there were prospects of an improvement in relations owing to the existence of common interests between the Soviets and the West in avoiding nuclear conflict and confronting Chinese militancy. In the long run the technological revolution offered prospects of a gradual narrowing of the gulf between the communist and non-communist systems. 

“Such were the arguments of the 1960s. Despite the revival of neo-Stalinism toward the end of the decade, the arguments survived and gained weight until the later 1970s. 

“The apparent opening up of cracks between the communist states was assessed as an encouraging development. The emergence of a range of different brands of communism seemed to show how ideology had lost its binding force. The rivalries between the communist states appeared rooted in traditional national sentiment. . . . 

“To sum up, the apparent loss of revolutionary ardor, the apparent disunity in the bloc and movement, the apparent preoccupation of the communist states with fratricidal struggles, and the advent of détente all pointed to the same conclusion: The Cold War was over. The new situation seemed to demand accommodation and a positive response to communism rather than the old forms of resistance and containment. . . . 

“The abandonment by the West of concerted policies toward the communist world led to changes in Western diplomatic practice. Personal contacts—including confidential talks—negotiations, and understandings between leading communist and noncommunist statesmen, even if initiated by the communist side, were welcomed in the West. A unilateral approach to relations with communist countries became the norm. General de Gaulle’s visit to Moscow in 1966 revived talk of the Franco-Russian alliance of the 1890s and the Franco-Soviet pact of the 1930s. The United States agreed to conducting the SALT negotiations with the Soviet Union on a bilateral basis. Regular bilateral political consultations between the Soviets and the French and Italian governments became accepted practice. In West Germany the argument for an opening to the East gathered strength and found expression in Chancellor Brandt’s Ost politik in the early 1970s. The Western response to China’s détente diplomacy appeared not to be concerted. There were conspicuous examples of failure to consult; for example, the Japanese were not warned by the Americans of the Nixon-Kissinger initiative in China in 1971; President Giscard d’Estaing gave his allies little or no notice of his meeting with Brezhnev in Warsaw in May 1980. 

“The widening of the range of the contacts between communist diplomats and politicians in the noncommunist world was as warmly greeted as the widening of Western contacts with the communist world. 

“With the advent of detente Western business interests pressed for the expansion of trade with communist countries. . . . 

“Detente and disinformation on communist “evolution” provided grounds for socialist parties to view with greater favor the formation of united fronts with communist parties. Apart from improving the chances of socialists’ gaining power, united fronts looked like a promising device for influencing communist parties to move closer to social democracy and further from the Soviet Union. . . . 

“Opposition to communism in principle became unfashionable. The basic differences between democracy and communism were lost from sight. It was considered more rewarding to seek out common interests through increasing East-West scientific, cultural, and sporting exchanges that, it was thought, would contribute to the liberalization of communist regimes. In the 1960s anticommunist writers virtually lost their admission tickets to the communications media; their attitude was deemed inimical to détente. . . . 

“The success of the communist disinformation program has engendered a state of crisis in Western assessments of communist affairs and therefore a crisis in Western policy toward the communist world. The meaning of developments in the communist bloc is misunderstood and the intentions behind communist actions are misinterpreted. Enemies are accepted and treated as though they were allies of the West. The Soviet military threat is recognized, but the strategic political threat is not comprehended and is therefore underestimated. Communist political offensives, in the form of détente diplomacy and disarmament negotiations, are seen as indications of communist moderation. Communist strategy, instead of being blocked, is unwittingly assisted by Western policies. . . . 

“. . . the communist strategists are now poised to enter into the final, offensive phase of the long-range policy, entailing a joint struggle for the complete triumph of communism. Given the multiplicity of parties in power, the close links between them, and the opportunities they have had to broaden their bases and build up experienced cadres, the communist strategists are equipped, in pursuing their policy, to engage in maneuvers and strategems beyond the imagination of Marx or the practical reach of Lenin and unthinkable to Stalin. Among such previously unthinkable strategems are the introduction of false liberalization in Eastern Europe and, probably, in the Soviet Union and the exhibition of spurious independence on the part of the regimes in Romania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. . . . 

“If in a reasonable time “liberalization” can be successfully achieved in Poland and elsewhere, it will serve to revitalize the communist regimes concerned. The activities of the false opposition will further confuse and undermine the genuine opposition in the communist world. Externally, the role of dissidents will be to persuade the West that the “liberalization” is spontaneous and not controlled. “Liberalization” will create conditions for establishing solidarity between trade unions and intellectuals in the communist and noncommunist worlds. In time such alliances will generate new forms of pressure against Western “militarism,” “racism,” and “military-industrial complexes” and in favor of disarmament and the kind of structural changes in the West predicted in Sakharov’s writings. . . . 

“The promotion of the former KGB chief [Andropov], who was responsible for the preparation of the false liberalization strategy in the USSR, indicates that this factor was decisive in his selection and further points to the imminent advent of such “liberalization” in the near future. 

“The rise of Andropov fits into a familiar pattern whereby the former security chief becomes the party leader in order to secure the important shift in the realization of the strategy. Kadar, who introduced the so-called “liberalization” in Hungary; Hua Kuo-feng, under whom China shifted to “capitalist pragmatism”; and Kania, who initiated the Polish “renewal” and recognized Solidarity—all had been former security chiefs. This pattern reflects the crucial role of the security services in the “liberalization” of communist regimes. . . . 

“. . . the “liberalization” will not be limited to the USSR, but will be expanded to Eastern Europe and particularly to Poland. . . .  

“The coming offensive of the communist strategists will pursue the following objectives: 

“• The establishment of a model government for Western Europe, which will facilitate the inclusion of the so-called Eurocommunist parties into government coalitions with socialists and the trade unions. 

“• The dissolution of NATO and the Warsaw Pacts, the neutralization of Western Europe, and the Finlandization of Western Europe in general, through the advocacy of European collective security. 

“• The provision of a broader basis and impetus for expansion of the antimilitary movement by a more active involvement of Catholics and other believers in the West, thereby forcing the United States into a disadvantageous disarmament. 

“• Influencing the 1984 United States presidential election in favor of candidates who are more likely to deal with the leaders of the “liberalized” regimes in the USSR and East Europe and are more inclined to sacrifice the US military posture. 

“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. 

 “Developments have accurately confirmed the prediction that the communist strategists would undertake the political initiative on disarmament, particularly against West Germany. The trip of Gro-myko to Bonn, the invitation of social democratic opposition leaders to Moscow, and the statements of Andropov on missile concessions (made to influence the West German elections) are all clear indications of such a political initiative. As expected, the communist initiative revealed that its main target was the socialist parties. It also showed that there are elements in their leadership who are vulnerable to such an initiative, especially those in the West German social democratic party who have anti-NATO and anti US views, or who like Brandt and Sweden’s social democrat Palme are ready to embrace Rapacki’s idea of a nuclear-free zone in Central Europe. The initiative increased also the pressure on the US for concessions to the USSR. In the opinion of the author, however, the communist initiative has not yet reached its peak. How will the Western German social democrats respond when the communist regimes begin their “liberalization” by making concessions on human rights, such as easing emigration, granting amnesty for the dissidents, or removing the Berlin wall? One can expect that Soviet agents of influence in Western Europe, drawing on these developments, will become active. It is more than likely that these cosmetic steps will be taken as genuine by the West and will trigger a reunification and neutralization of West Germany and further the collapse of NATO. The pressure on the United States for concessions on disarmament and accommodation with the Soviets will increase. During this period there might be an extensive display of the fictional struggle for power in the Soviet leadership. One cannot exclude that at the next party congress or earlier, Andropov will be replaced by a younger leader with a more liberal image who will continue the so-called “liberalization” more intensively.” 

Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear knows this is the truth. You can see the various predictions that have come true. And you can see, without me needing to explain it, how it ties into the present situation. 

Lastly, the communist leaders have admitted their deception – we just haven’t paid attention. Mikhail Gorbachev, who presided over Glasnost (reeopening) and Perestroika (restructuring), for instance, wrote at length about the deception. He laughed at the West’s ignorance in assuming these programs meant the end of communism. In his book Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, he wrote exactly what this Soviet-engineered “new thinking” is all about: 

“The life-giving impetus of our great Revolution was too powerful for the Party and people to reconcile themselves to phenomena that were threatening to squander its gains. The works of Lenin and his ideals of socialism remained for us an inexhaustible source of dialectical creative thought, theoretical wealth and political sagacity. His very image is an undying example of lofty moral strength, all-round spiritual culture and selfless devotion to the cause of the people and to socialism. Lenin lives on in the minds and hearts of millions of people. Breaking down all the barriers erected by scholastics and dogmatists, an interest in Lenin’s legacy and a thirst to know him more extensively in the original grew as negative phenomena in society accumulated. 

“Turning to Lenin has greatly stimulated the Party and society in their search to find explanations and answers to the questions that have arisen. . . . 

“The concept of restructuring with all the problems involved had been evolving gradually. Way back before the April Plenary Meeting a group of Party and state leaders had begun a comprehensive analysis of the state of the economy. Their analysis then became the basis for the documents of perestroika. Using the recommendations of scientists and experts, our entire potential, all the best that social thought had created, we elaborated the basic ideas and drafted a policy which we subsequently began to implement. . . . 

“I have long appreciated a remarkable formula advanced by Lenin: socialism is the living creativity of the masses. Socialism is not an a priori theoretical scheme, in keeping with which society is divided into two groups: those who give instructions and those who follow them. I am very much against such a simplified and mechanical understanding of socialism. 

“People, human beings with all their creative diversity, are the makers of history. So the initial task of restructuring—an indispensable condition, necessary if it is to be successful—is to “wake up” those people who have “fallen asleep” and make them truly active and concerned, to ensure that everyone feels as the is the master of the country, of his enterprise, office, or institute. This is the main thing. . . . 

“In the West, Lenin is often portrayed as an advocate of authoritarian methods of administration. This is a sign of total ignorance of Lenin’s ideas and, not infrequently, of their deliberate distortion. In effect, according to Lenin, socialism and democracy are indivisible. By gaining democratic freedoms the working masses come to power. It is also only in conditions of expanding democracy that they can consolidate and realize that power. There is another remarkably true idea of Lenin’s: the broader the scope of the work and the deeper the reform, the greater the need to increase the interest in it and convince millions and millions of people of its necessity. This means that if we have set out for a radical and all-round restructuring, we must also unfold the entire potential of democracy. . . . 

“Perestroika means overcoming the stagnation process, breaking down the braking mechanism, creating a dependable and effective mechanism for the acceleration of social and economic progress and giving it greater dynamism. 

“Perestroika means mass initiative. It is the comprehensive development of democracy, socialist self-government, encouragement of initiative and creative endeavor, improved order and discipline, more glasnost, criticism and self-criticism in all spheres of our society. It is utmost respect for the individual and consideration for personal dignity. 

“Perestroika is the all-round intensification of the Soviet economy, the revival and development of the principles of democratic centralism in running the national economy, the universal introduction of economic methods, the renunciation of management by injunction and by administrative methods, and the overall encouragement of innovation and socialist enterprise. 

“Perestroika means a resolute shift to scientific methods, an ability to provide a solid scientific basis for every new initiative. It means the combination of the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution with a planned economy. 

“Perestroika means priority development of the social sphere aimed at ever better satisfaction of the Soviet people’s requirements for good living and working conditions, for good rest and recreation, education and health care. It means unceasing concern for cultural and spiritual wealth, for the culture of every individual and society as a whole. 

“Perestroika means the elimination from society of the distortions of socialist ethics, the consistent implementation of the principles of social justice. It means the unity of words and deeds, rights and duties. It is the elevation of honest, highly-qualified labor, the overcoming of leveling tendencies in pay and consumerism. 

“This is how we see perestroika today. . . . 

“. . . The essence of perestroika lies in the fact that it unites socialism with democracy and revives the Leninist concept of socialist construction both in theory and in practice. Such is the essence of perestroika, which accounts for its genuine revolutionary spirit and its all-embracing scope. . . . 

“Perestroika is closely connected with socialism as a system. That side of the matter is being widely discussed, especially abroad, and our talk about perestroika won’t be entirely clear if we don’t touch upon that aspect. 

“Does perestroika mean that we are giving up socialism or at least some of its foundations? Some ask this question with hope, others with misgiving. . . . 

“To put an end to all the rumors and speculations that abound in the West about this, I would like to point out once again that we are conducting all our reforms in accordance with the socialist choice. We are looking within socialism, rather than outside it, for the answers to all the questions that arise. We assess our successes and errors alike by socialist standards. Those who hope that we shall move away from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed. Every part of our program of perestroika—and the program as a whole, for that matter—is fully based on the principle of more socialism and more democracy. . . . 

“More socialism means more democracy, openness and collectivism in everyday life, more culture and humanism in production, social and personal relations among people, more dignity and self-respect for the individual.” 

After reading this, only a fool can believe the Soviets’ “restructuring” and “openness” were anything other than ploys to trick the easily-deceived ignoramuses in the West – those who don’t know a single thing about what communism is, what it wants, and how it operates. 

I remind you that this admission of strategic deception was written in 1987, showing how pre-planned and contrived this Soviet-engineered Leninist revival really is. It should make people step back and reconsider the media lies they were fed when the Soviet dictator who presided over and instituted “Perestroika” and the Soviet “collapse” admits in writing that the entire purpose was to have “more socialism” in the world, “more collectivism in everyday life,” and to revitalize Leninism! Remind me again how “communism is dead. . .” 

The Soviets have always self-evaluated and have changed tactics when necessary. They’re pragmatists. For these Satanic conspirators, the ends justify the means. They’ll present any false face, wear any outward disguise, make any high-minded promise, and do any underhanded and wicked act to achieve their goal. And what is their goal? The crest of the USSR tells us plainer than words can – a hammer and sickle over the globe. 

As noted earlier, this “collapse” was pre-planned. Early on, the Soviets planned to launch “the most spectacular peace movement on record” and give “unheard-of concessions” to the “stupid and decadent” West. This was always in the cards. Gorbachev was simply the one installed to make it happen. And who told him to make it happen? That’s the real kicker. 

It may surprise many to know that Mikhail Gorbachev did not concoct this plan. Neither did his political predecessors. Rather, all of these were operating on orders from a higher source. The source? Satan. You can choose to roll your eyes or discount the Devil’s existence or the extent of his influence, but I testify that Satan actively governs the nations and is very hands-on in the work of global oppression. But Satan is cunning – he doesn’t come in his own name, nor does he appear in a ball of fire with a gleaming pitchfork. Rather, he appears as an angel of light, the light-bearer, and a friend of humanity and progress. 

The name Lord Maitreya is not known to many people, but it is known to the world Elite. Lord Maitreya is the leader of a group of disembodied evil spirits known as the Hierarchy or Brotherhood. Their followers are occultists. They’re found at the United Nations, in governments, in militaries, in private organizations, etc. 

I call forth merely one corroborating account from a former U.S. diplomat named Wayne S. Peterson. He says that one of the Ascended Masters of Wisdom, which is what the members of the Hierarchy are called, appeared to him and he was instructed by him and was taught of Lord Maitreya. On one particular diplomatic trip, Peterson spoke of being introduced to a large group of world leaders whom, he was told, all knew of Lord Maitreya. His account reads: 

“The monarch then explained that everyone in the room knew Maitreya and was cooperating with his mission, although their identities must be kept secret until Maitreya himself comes forward and speaks openly to the world. 

“There was one individual, however, who made it clear he had no problem with the public knowing he had met the Christ. His name was Mikhail Gorbachev. . . . 

“I was not surprised to learn this about Mr. Gorbachev, since I had heard much earlier of his involvement with Maitreya from a Pentagon official. I had also heard, from people I place much confidence in, that Mrs. Gorbachev had been to India several times to see the Avatar Sai Baba . . . From the freedom and openness [Gorbachev] introduced to the Soviet Union, it appeared obvious to me that he was being influenced by the Christ. Eventually, we will hear more of this story and how the Soviet empire collapsed. 

“What I appreciate about this story is story is the sure knowledge that the Masters have already undertaken the task of offering important world leaders a role in the coming global changes and of preparing them for the Day of Declaration. These leaders, who are undoubtedly disciples of the Masters, will be working to promote the goals of the Spiritual Hierarchy” (Wayne S. Peterson, Extraordinary Times, Extraordinary Beings: Experiences of an American Diplomat with Maitreya and the Masters of Wisdom, 99-100). 

Mass-murdering Soviet dictator Gorbachev was a follower of Lord Maitreya and was operating on his orders when he “collapsed” the Soviet Union! Numerous other household names could be placed on the list of Maitreya’s followers. Satan, parading as an angel of light, actively appears to the world Elite, giving them instructions for how to usher in a one-world government and one-world occult religion. The Apostle John wasn’t lying when he said the Dragon, Satan, is the one who empowers the beast system that is to seize control of the world and overcome the saints (Revelation 13). 

Dear reader, communism is not dead. The Soviet Union did not fall. It’s planned “collapse” was political theater choreographed by demons and acted out by skilled conmen. Russia today is every bit as much on the dark side as the USSR was. It pretends to be a bastion of traditionalism and Christianity, but, having lived there, I can put that myth to rest with zero hesitation. 

Vladimir Putin, a KGB operative and one of the conmen mentioned, has cleverly played his part, deceiving the nations. Putin openly lamented the dissolution of the Soviet Union as the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the last century, has invaded multiple nations, tampers in American society and politics, threatens NATO with nuclear war as a matter of habit, holds Europe hostage through their dependence on Russia’s natural gas, is allied with Iran, Turkey, China, and other tyrannical regimes, oppresses his own people, kills or imprisons his political opposition, and is a fake “Christian” who targets real Christian churches and leads gullible conservatives by the nose with polished rhetoric about his supposed faith and principles. 

Those who believe Russia is an innocent victim, the democratic defender of picked-on peoples, or think Russia gets a bad rap, don’t have any clue and are blind to reality. They want Russia to be one of the good guys. They want Putin to be a true opponent to the New World Order. They want Russia to be a revivalist nation and a safe haven for Western values. But all of this is wishful thinking unsupported by facts. If only people would finally admit that the Soviet Union did not “collapse,” but faked its “fall” in order to fool the West and lull us to sleep in preparation for the final battle for communist world domination, the long-awaited “World October,” perhaps the scales would fall from their eyes and the truth would have a chance to enter their minds. 

2. Russia is NOT Surrounded by NATO 

One of the most prevalent and poppycock deceptions I see floating around is that poor ol’ Russia is surrounded by a threatening and hostile NATO. Have the people who repeat this stupidity looked at a map recently? Have they bothered to count Russia’s allies? Have they studied geopolitics for five minutes? I know geography isn’t most people’s strongest area, but I hope I can convince you that it’s an important factor in correctly analyzing world events. 

When you look at a map, you realize that Russia is by far the largest nation on earth and is bordered by the following: 

Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China, and North Korea. Russia also shares sea “borders” with Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Iran, Turkmenistan, Japan, and the United States. The part of Russia that borders Poland is a small parcel called Kaliningrad and is not attached to Russia proper.  

Let’s look at these countries more closely. Japan, North Korea, China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Finland are not NATO members. By my count, that’s eleven –the majority. Of the other ten that are NATO members, four of them – the United States, Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey – only share water “borders,” and one, Poland, doesn’t touch Russia proper. That’s hardly “surrounded” by NATO. 

“But, but, but,” people splutter, “look at a map – NATO is hemming Russia in on its western flank!” Really? Hemming them in how? And from what? If Russia has no ambitions to expand westward, what is everyone so worried about? A major portion of the western border is the Ukraine – a country which Russia invaded in 2014 and is gradually consuming and turning into Russia proper. The other major part of the border is the extremely close ally Belarus.  

Let’s talk about Belarus. Russia routinely conducts military war games in Belarus and in November conducted a snap combat drill there with its paratroopers. Unless I’m mistaken, isn’t that a provocation to NATO? But we must ask, why has Belarus been in the news lately? That’s right, because Russia has been using it to conduct hybrid-warfare operations against Poland and Western Europe. The specific action is to allow illegal immigrants to flood across Belarus’s border in an attempt to overload Europe and create humanitarian crises. Interestingly, the capital of Belarus is Minsk where the Minsk Accords were signed regarding Ukraine. Perhaps Russia’s and Belarus’s duplicity towards Poland should cast a shadow of doubt over their constant cries that NATO is violating the Minsk Accords in Ukraine (a falsehood we’ll discuss below). 

Russia could easily use Belarus and Ukraine as buffer states, but, instead, they invade the one and use the other to stage operations against Poland and to house their soldiers. So, who is really provoking whom? 

Not counting Poland, which only touches tiny Kaliningrad and doesn’t border traditional Russian territory, Russia only borders the small Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Scandinavian nations of Finland and Norway. Finland isn’t in NATO, but the others are. Let’s ask: Is Norway a threat? Hardly. Are the Baltic nations going to invade Russia anytime soon? Nope. Yes, Estonia does have NATO troops – which were invited in after Russia conducted sabotage operations against the nation and tried to orchestrate a coup. Again, how can anyone with honesty say NATO surrounds Russia or that Russia lives in fear of NATO aggression? 

Let’s talk about Turkey and Iran. Turkey, though a member of NATO, is a de facto ally of Russia. Yes, Turkey is nationalistic and would love to return to its Ottoman glory days and generally plays to gain its own advantages, but it knows the realities on the ground and has curried favor with Russia. Ankara is also heavily dependent upon Russian oil and natural gas, importing approximately 50% of its gas from its northern neighbor. When push comes to shove, I highly doubt Turkey will be in NATO’s camp. They have too much to lose by ticking off Russia and too little to gain by standing should-to-shoulder with NATO during a conflict. 

Additionally, in 2018, Russia, Turkey, and Iran held a joint summit, cementing their friendship and strengthening ties and pulling Turkey farther away from NATO. The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies observed at the time: 

“Several threats have brought Iran, Turkey, and Russia together: the war in Syria; terrorism and extremism; and, to an extent, Kurdish separatism (Russia shares Ankara’s and Tehran’s concerns about this). Crucially, US pressure of varying degrees on each of the three powers serves as glue to promote their cooperation in resisting the liberal world order. The three seek to remake the world order as they no longer benefit sufficiently from post-Cold War arrangements. Each wants new space for balancing. . . . 

“Significantly, the Russian, Turkish, and Iranian peoples all have a similar historical experience of anti-imperialist struggle. They believe “Eurasia” can provide an alternative to the West’s cultural, historical, political, and economic dominance. 

“More importantly for smaller countries, the three also advance the concept of “regional ownership,” which prioritizes bilateral cooperation in regional problems without the involvement of third parties. In this way, Turkey and Russia pursued a shared vision in the Black Sea and cooperated in the South Caucasus following the Second Karabakh War. Efforts were made in Libya as well, and similar ideas were expressed (at least rhetorically) about the recent crisis between Israel and the Hamas organization. 

“Iran has similar aspirations to Russia when it comes to the Caspian Sea. No foreign powers are allowed into the region, and smaller states with access to the Sea have to acknowledge Tehran’s and Moscow’s vital energy and security interests. 

“The trio’s aspiration to sideline the West is visible in concrete initiatives. The Astana Talks are nothing but an attempt to advance an alternative vision to the Syrian problem. Similar attempts were made in the South Caucasus, when Turkey and Iran proposed and supported the idea of creating a regional pact on security and cooperation that has no place for the West. 

“Russia has long aspired to better ties with Turkey and Iran. Even in the Soviet period, Moscow periodically attempted to advance a form of cooperation with those two countries that would exclude the West. Both states gradually emerged as pillars of Russia’s post-Soviet aspirations to construct a more active foreign policy in the Middle East and remold the existing world order. . . . 

“This trend of finding common ground without formal obligations is characteristic of the post-unipolar world. Russia and China officially refuse to have an alliance—indeed, they claim an alliance would undermine their purportedly benevolent intentions toward one another. While much of this is just rhetoric to conceal the absence of any common cultural or otherwise important features necessary for a geopolitical alliance, this behavior is part of an emerging trend in which Eurasian states prefer maneuverability to the shackles of formal obligations. 

“For Russia, intensive cooperation with Turkey and Iran is beneficial inasmuch as it provides leverage over the West and allows Moscow to solve critical problems in the Black Sea, Caucasus, and Caspian regions, as well as Syria. With that said, it is doubtful how much Russia wants Turkey to completely sever its ties with NATO. In a way, Turkey’s position as a member of the alliance—one that generates continuous intra-alliance tensions—benefits Russia more than an unshackled Turkey would. The latter scenario would ease NATO’s internal problems and perhaps even diminish Turkey’s importance in Russia’s geopolitical calculus. 

“As far as Iran is concerned, Russia seeks to render the Islamic Republic dependent on its diplomatic clout. A long-term solution to Iran’s nuclear stalemate is the Kremlin’s least desired scenario. While it would allow Russian companies to penetrate Iran’s market, that market would also be opened up to more competitive Western enterprises. A closer interaction beyond the partnership is also not an option for Russia.” 

In this analysis, Ankara plays for itself and is opportunistic. Be that as it may, the analysis also acknowledged that Turkey’s ties with Russia and Iran help “sideline” NATO’s agenda. Additionally, if we think of opportunism, then what I noted earlier about Turkey’s reliance on Russian energy is valid. However you slice it, Turkey isn’t a threat to Russia. 

Indeed, since 2018, the three-way relationship has grown stronger. Even as Turkey and Iran both rise in respective power, they gravitate towards Russia, which is also reasserting itself. Like moons in the solar system, they find larger bodies to orbit. Russia doesn’t need to worry about its Turkish and Iranian borders in the slightest (as a fun side note, the Iranian Ayatollah was trained by the KGB and is little more than a Russian puppet). 

What about the Baltic states? When the Soviets faked their “collapse,” they left behind members of the nomenklatura – the Soviet elite class – to take over. Sometimes, these agents feigned to be members of opposition or nationalist parties. In all cases, however, “former” communist members of the Kremlin-beholden nomenklatura came to power in the Soviet satellites. This includes Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. 

That said, the people in these three states largely hate Russia and remember being conquered and oppressed by the Soviet regime. Estonia particularly is staunchly anti-Russia. Of the trio, Lithuania is the weakest link. Russia, in fact, operates a railway that runs through Belarus, through Lithuania’s capital Vilnius (which I visited and is a nice city), and on to Kaliningrad. Russia also holds Lithuania’s economic fate in its hands by holding the threat of banning its exports or cutting of its gas supplies if it does not comply with its policies. This is not an idle threat; it’s happened before. 

As a result of the legitimate, grassroots opposition to its schemes, Russia plans to forcibly conquer the Baltics again. In January, the Center for European Policy Analysis wrote about Russia’s hybrid-warfare campaign against Estonia: 

“Russia uses considerably different weapons in its hybrid war against Estonia than against Ukraine or Belarus. The Kremlin’s efforts against Estonia are focused primarily on the country’s less-integrated Russian speakers and Estonia’s highly digitalized society. Russia backs these up with a steady military buildup and show of force in its Western Military District, which includes the Kaliningrad exclave to the west and borders Estonia to the east. Other tactics, such as massive money laundering through Nordic banks based in Estonia, are part of a much wider Russian pattern of using the West’s weaknesses to its own advantage. Massive flows of Russian money to European and off-shore banks – most of which are likely laundered considering the obscurity of the schemes and actors – serve not only the purpose of fulfilling the financial and personal interests of Russia’s leaders and oligarchs, but also of feeding corruption and manipulating Western countries. 

“Russia’s non-conventional actions against Estonia have a long history, stretching back at least as far as a failed coup d’état attempt in Tallinn organized by the Soviet Union on December 1, 1924. Fifteen years later, the Soviet occupation and annexation of the Baltic countries in 1939-1940 finds echoes in Russia’s seizure of Crimea in 2014. 

“The restoration of Estonia’s independence in August 1991 began a new battle in the Kremlin’s hybrid warfare against the country. Despite then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s generally democratic sympathies, Russia tried mightily to thwart the Baltics’ natural ambition to reunite with Europe and the trans-Atlantic community. The Kremlin repeatedly and falsely accused Estonia, since the early 1990s, on totally false grounds, of ethnic cleansing, “apartheid in white gloves” and the glorification of fascism. . . . 

“While Russia is bulking up its military muscle on all fronts, its Western Military District has once again become, as in the Cold War, a clear priority. Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave is increasingly militarized, including weapons of blackmail such as Iskander missile systems and likely tactical nuclear weapons, meant to put its unfriendly neighbors on notice. The Baltic states are virtually doubly covered by Russian A2/AD (Anti-Access and Area Denial) protective domes from Kaliningrad, as well as the Leningrad and Pskov oblasts. The Russian navy (Baltic fleet) and air force are very active in or above the Baltic Sea, often violating the maritime boundaries and air space of other countries, including Estonia, and bedeviling ships and aircraft of NATO countries. 

“Russia has recently conducted large snap exercises to gauge its combat readiness close to NATO territory. It also holds regular strategic-level exercises in its western reaches, including some with Belarus. The next large exercise will be Zapad 2021, probably in September. 

“As opposition protests continue in Belarus, formally an ally of Russia, President Aliaksandr Lukashenka may soon have no choice but to submit to certain demands from the Kremlin in order to maintain his grip on power, even including deployment of Russian forces to and use of air bases in Belarus. That would set alarm bells ringing for NATO and the Baltics, because the roughly 65-mile (105-kilometer) distance from southeastern Kaliningrad to northwestern Belarus happens to be the Lithuanian-Polish border across the Suwalki Gap. 

“With Russian troops at both ends, they would need only to cover a small stretch to meet in the middle and cut the Baltics off from their NATO and EU neighbors. Far from de-escalating, the Kremlin considers such military threats an effective political and psychological weapon against the West. The logic of a possible Russian aggression against the Baltic states is not necessarily, if at all, linked to them or the security situation in the Baltic and Nordic regions. It is about Russia willing to weaken and undermine NATO, and eventually use the opportunity to attack the weakest point in the Alliance’s posture. . . . 

“. . . Russia’s willingness to sow strife among Estonia’s ethnic and linguistic groups, helps explain the Estonian government’s decision in 2007 to move a “liberator” statue of a Red Army soldier from the city center of Tallinn to a nearby cemetery. It also helps explain the protests, riots, and Russian cyberattacks that followed the decision. 

“The events of the spring of 2007 revealed some truths about Estonian society, including that its Russian speakers were far from integrated into society, that official Russian propaganda could influence Estonia’s Russian minority, and that Russia would not hesitate to meddle in Estonia’s internal affairs given a chance. . . . 

“The result was shows of support from Estonia’s allies and the international community while Russia refused to cooperate in the investigation and denied vehemently any state-level involvement. This practice of ‘plausible deniability’ is by now very well established – Russia continues to deny its direct role in e.g. the Ukrainian Donbas. 

“The Russian government pretended that it retaliated against Estonia by severely cutting the oil and other goods it sent through Estonian ports, mainly Muuga and Tallinn, ostensibly in retaliation for moving the soldier memorial. Later, it became clear that the redirection of much of Russia’s maritime exports to the Russian ports of Ust-Luga and Primorsk, in the Gulf of Finland, was related not to the “Bronze Soldier” but to the business interests of members of President Putin’s inner circle. 

“The spring 2007 cyberattacks were a kind of turning point. Russia showed that it was willing and able to wage hybrid warfare, while Estonia became the first country to mount a successful cyber defense despite facing a massive, surprise attack and lacking much experience in the field. Estonia soon became home to NATO’s Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCD CoE), which had been planned before the 2007 attacks but gained some urgency because of them. . . . 

“Russia’s principal tools of hybrid warfare against Estonia are undoubtedly its state-owned and specialized propaganda and disinformation channels. These include, as in the case of most other Western countries, the RT (formerly Russia Today) TV channel and the Sputnik news agency, news website, and radio broadcast (formerly Voice of Russia and RIA Novosti). These two Kremlin “news” brands, with nearly global reach and budgets that exceed the BBC’s, are Russia’s inverted versions of CNN and Voice of America/Radio Liberty. Just as the Moscow-led Eurasian Economic Union and the Collective Security Treaty Organization pretend to be analogs of and responses to the European Union and NATO. 

“Estonia has a fairly large non-ethnic Estonian, mainly Russian-speaking minority, who make up about 27% of the population. That, together with its history and its border with Russia, makes Estonia an attractive target especially for other Russian state-owned TV channels. . . . 

“The fight against Russian hybrid warfare, including propaganda and disinformation, is inherently asymmetric because Western governments cannot adopt Russia’s behavior and tactics, and the openness of Western democratic societies makes them more hospitable to bad-faith actors and more vulnerable to misinformation than Russia’s controlled information space. Western countries have to help their citizens become more aware of Russia’s aims and hybrid tools, including its subversive propaganda and disinformation. 

“Finally, Russia’s money laundering and export of corruption undermine Western countries and societies. It makes little sense or impact to counter only Russia’s efforts in cyberspace and the media, or to try to limit European dependence on Russian energy without rooting out Russian money laundering and corruption.” 

Russia gripes about the NATO “threat” in the Baltics, yet remains silent about its own subversion operations against the Baltic states! Whenever you hear someone say that NATO’s troops in Estonia threaten Russia, ask them about Russia’s 2007 operations that precipitated Estonia begging for a NATO presence. 

Finally, I quote from a NATO document titled “Russia’s top five myths about NATO.” Number 1 on the list is the proposition that “NATO is trying to encircle Russia.” The document offers this rebuttal: 

“Fact: This claim ignores the facts of geography. Russia’s land border is just over 20,000 kilometres long. Of that, 1,215 kilometres, or less than one-sixteenth, face current NATO members. 

“Claims that NATO is building bases around Russia are similarly groundless. Outside the territory of NATO nations, NATO only maintains a significant military presence in three places: Kosovo, Afghanistan, and at sea off the Horn of Africa. All three operations are carried out under United Nations mandate, and thus carry the approval of Russia, along with all other Security Council members. Before Russia’s aggressive actions against Ukraine began, Russia provided logistical support to the Afghan mission, and cooperated directly with the counter-piracy operation, showing clearly that Russia viewed them as a benefit, not a threat. 

“NATO has partnership relationships with many countries in Europe and Asia, as can be seen from this interactive map. Such partnerships, which are requested by the partners in question, focus exclusively on issues agreed with them, such as disaster preparedness and relief, transparency, armed forces reform, and counter-terrorism. These partnerships cannot legitimately be considered a threat to Russia, or to any other country in the region, let alone an attempt at encirclement.” 

As I began, geography is important. A simple look at the map is enough to convince any right-thinking person that Moscow is lying – as usual. Even when Moscow tells the truth, it still lies, because it only tells the truth to further its agenda and harm the West. Communists are the master deceivers. Don’t buy their lie about NATO encirclement. 

3. Russia is the Aggressor in Ukraine 

In the not-too-distant past, Soviet Russia invaded and occupied Ukraine. Stalin’s henchmen later perpetrated a mass genocide against the Ukrainian people known as the Holodomor. Perhaps as many as 12 million perished due to forced famine and Satanic savagery. It was a real holocaust. 

From the days of the Soviet occupation and the Holodomor, Russia has variously waged open or covert war against Ukrainians. Contrary to polls which claim that Ukrainians love Russia, most of the Ukrainians I met when I lived in Russia (I lived with two Ukrainians for half a year during my two-year stay) and when I twice visited Ukraine, weren’t terribly fond of Russia. Of course, Ukrainians in Eastern Ukraine hold a more favorable view, but Western Ukrainians are fiercely nationalistic and despise Russian aggression. 

When the Soviet Union faked its “collapse” and withdrew from Ukraine, it fully intended to reclaim the state at a future date. They left behind caches of weapons and a significant population. Russia has at times dictated Ukrainian policy by influencing its governmental leaders. In 2014, it all boiled over into the current conflict. Just what happened in 2014? 

Perhaps we’d better jump backward to 2013. In late 2013 to early 2014, Russia manipulated legitimately rising dissent among Ukrainians towards their government (I saw protestors camped in tents outside the presidential residence during my visits in 2007 and 2008). They used the situation to carry out a fake coup and install a new regime – similar to the fake “fall” of the Soviet government. Just like in the latter instance, Ukrainian security forces and intelligence services stood down and allowed the scripted event to play out on international TV. 

When this scam was underway, Alex Jones and many of the biggest names in the conspiracy world alleged, based on a fake story that was never verified on the ground, that the United States or its proxies gave $5 Billion to foment war and bring about regime change in Ukraine. It was a rumor with no legs from the beginning. Thankfully, at least a few credible researchers, such as Joel Skousen, debunked the notion. 

Credit where credit is due: Joel Skousen was one of the only analysts to correctly say at the time that Russia, not NATO, was behind the phony coup. Before Skousen published his analysis pegging Russia as the guilty party, I had been online telling folks that Russia was behind it and that Ukraine is Russia’s sphere of influence and NATO has virtually no power there. It was refreshing to be vindicated by one whose name carries some weight. Since then, I’ve had some disagreements with Mr. Skousen, but I’ll address those at a later date. 

The bottom line is that Russia manipulated genuine dissent and carried out regime change. In the confusion, Putin marched into Crimea and annexed it. In a 2020 National Security Report by Jonathan Cosgrove titled “The Russian Invasion of the Crimean Peninsula 2014-2015,” we get this excellent summary of the Crimean invasion and annexation: 

“In early 2014, the Russian Federation responded to the culminating Euromaidan movement in Ukraine by invading, occupying, and annexing Crimea. Acting without markings and accompanied by official denials from the Kremlin, Russian forces isolated and occupied Ukrainian political and military sites on the peninsula. Russia’s actions sparked a crisis much larger than that in Ukraine, with US leaders considering military responses, including “increasing military exercises, forward deploying additional military equipment and personnel, and increasing [US] naval, air, and ground presence,”1 all amid aggressive nuclear posturing from Moscow. Viewing Ukraine as a stage for its confrontation with the United States and Europe, Russia, in addition to the invasion, advanced nuclear messaging and threats meant to deter any intervention on behalf of Ukraine. . . .  

“Even before Euromaidan, the autonomous Verkhovna Rada of Crimea (Supreme Council of Crimea) expressed opposition to association with the EU, and Russian NGOs in Crimea began advocating for the peninsula to hold a revised legal status relative to Ukraine and Russia. In response to Euromaidan, the Supreme Council expressed its support for the Yanukovych government, urging him to declare a state of emergency, and pro-Russian groups staged rallies in Simferopol supporting Ukrainian entry into the Eurasian Customs Union.61 However, Crimean support for Russia was not unanimous. The Muslim Crimean Tatar population and leadership opposed Russian activities on the peninsula, favored continued unity with Ukraine and association with the EU, and persistently protested and warned that Russia would annex the region—opposition that would later see the Crimean Tatar community oppressed under Russian occupation. 

“As Euromaidan progressed, signals and measures around Crimea increased. These included public discussion of separatism and secession by local officials and Russian television broadcasts, meetings between local and Russian officials, the distribution of Russian passports, the spread of claims that a new government in Kyiv would threaten ethnic-Russian populations and restrict use of the Russian language (some Russian NGOs even citing the threat of “genocide”), the mobilization of “self-defense units” and Cossacks to patrol streets and erect checkpoints, and official deliberation and actions of local officials toward separatism and appeals to Russia. 

“Although Russia clearly made preparations for a potential invasion and annexation, its decision to invade Crimea was directly responsive to the fall of the Yanukovych government. Recounting the events in a 2015 propaganda film, Putin said that on February 23 (one day after Yanukovych was officially removed from office) he “was speaking with colleagues and said, ‘Frankly, this is our historical territory and Russian people live there, they were in danger, and we cannot abandon them.’ . . . We never thought about severing Crimea from Ukraine until the moment that these events began, the government overthrow.”64 However, the Kremlin has alternatively said that the course of action was broached in December 2013, when the head of the Supreme Council of Crimea visited Moscow and said that, should Yanukovych fall, Crimea would be prepared “to join Russia.” 

“On February 22, the same day Yanukovych was officially removed from office, Spetsnaz of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) were sent to Crimea to secure strategic Russian facilities. The next day, Russia announced new embargoes against food from Ukraine, but the military apparatus was also put in motion. Convoys of Russian military vehicles began approaching Crimea through the Russian city of Novorossiysk, the Russian 45th Airborne Special Forces and six Mi-8 helicopters were airlifted into Anapa near Crimea, and additional strategic airlift Il-76 aircraft were redeployed to the city. Russian armored personnel carriers also moved out from the base into the city, and pro-Russian protests in Sevastopol asserted that they had elected a new city leader—Russian citizen Aleksei Chaly. Russian members of parliament later arrived to offer Russian citizenship and passports, promising that should Crimea ask to join Russia, it would be addressed swiftly. On February 25, the Black Sea Fleet was put on alert, Russian troops arrived in the Crimean city of Yalta, and Gazprom announced it might increase gas prices for Ukraine. 

“On February 26, while Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated a position of “principled non-intervention” in Ukraine,67 Putin ordered snap military exercises in western Russia, and a landing ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet arrived in Sevastopol carrying two hundred special operations forces. On February 27, the border between mainland Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula was blocked by checkpoints, and fifty Russian special operators disguised as local self-defense forces took control of the Supreme Council of Crimea and other administrative buildings in Simferopol, erecting Russian flags above the buildings. Under armed occupation, the Crimean regional government was dissolved and reformed and passed a measure approving a referendum on the status of Crimea seeking greater autonomy from Ukraine. The ports in Sevastopol were blockaded, with Ukrainian Navy and Coast Guard vessels surrounded. Russian fighter jets were put on standby. Later that night, unmarked special operators surrounded Belbek air base, and convoys of Russian transport and attack helicopters moved into Ukrainian airspace over Crimea the next morning. The new Ukrainian government officially summonsed Russia’s diplomatic representation to explain the military movements, but responses were delayed. Major troop landings and movements between Sevastopol and Simferopol continued through February 28, including the seizure of Simferopol Airport), which in turn facilitated the insertion of more Russian forces. . . . 

“On March 1, the Federal Assembly of Russia approved Putin’s request to use force in Ukraine to protect Russian interests, allowing for Russian forces to be utilized until the political situation in Ukraine normalized. That same day, Russian forces erected roadblocks and began digging trenches at the border with mainland Ukraine near Armyansk, secured control of the Kerch ferry port on the Ukrainian side of the Kerch Strait, and in Feodosiya besieged a Ukrainian base and blockaded the port with a Russian warship. On March 2, more Russian forces and vehicles traveled from Sevastopol to Simferopol, and Russian forces posted guards at the gates of a Ukrainian army base in Perevalne. Meanwhile the Federal Assembly began debating a law that would oblige the government to consider the annexation of any adjacent and predominantly Russian region that votes to join the country, and in a phone call with President Obama, Putin denied that Russia had used any force in Ukraine but said that if force were used, it would be a response to provocations by Ukraine. 

“On March 3 the blockade and besieging of Ukrainian army and naval forces on the Crimean Peninsula escalated as Russian forces presented an ultimatum: denounce the new government in Kyiv and swear allegiance to the new Crimean government or be forced to submit. Russia denied the reports, and the Russian envoy to the United Nations (UN) claimed that Yanukovych (at the time still recognized by Russia as president of Ukraine) asked Putin in writing for the use of force in Ukraine. Russian ships and flagged tugboats continued to box in Ukrainian naval forces on the peninsula, and armed Russian troops took up posts outside Ukrainian bases in Sevastopol and Simferopol. The influx of Russian military hardware into the peninsula continued with the arrival of ten combat helicopters and ten strategic lift aircraft. Meanwhile pro-Russian demonstrators in eastern mainland Ukraine began occupying government buildings in protest of the new pro-Western administration in Kyiv, and Putin announced that he had allegedly ordered Russian forces exercising near the Ukrainian border to return to base. 

“As the immobilization of Ukrainian forces continued and mobile phone service in areas of the country was disrupted, Putin denied on March 4 that the forces besieging Ukrainian troops in Crimea were Russian, instead identifying them as local self-defense forces. Russia’s ambassador to the UN displayed a photocopied letter allegedly signed by former president Yanukovych the same day, telling reporters it justified the movement of Russian forces into the peninsula. On March 6, the Supreme Council of Crimea, under new leadership, accelerated the time frame for the referendum on the status of Crimea and changed the question: rather than voting on greater autonomy from Ukraine, residents of Crimea would vote on accession to the Russian Federation, despite members of the body being barred from entering to participate in the vote. Russian lawmakers responded to the vote with promises to receive Crimea if the peninsula voted to leave in the referendum, as Russian military hardware continued to flow into the region and the first public ceremony swore in once-Ukrainian military personnel as members of the “Military Forces of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.” The sealing off of Ukrainian forces also continued, including the mixed use of soldiers and civilians armed with sticks and clubs to set up machine gun posts along a Ukrainian army landing strip in Saki, and the last military airstrip on the peninsula was under Russian control soon after, on March 9. That same day, Russian forces crossed into portions of mainland Ukraine adjacent to Crimea to set up minefields across the narrow corridor connecting the peninsula to the mainland. Ukrainian anti-aircraft forces in Yevpatoria were surrounded and ordered to surrender or face attack, and Russian troops captured a missile depot in Chornomorske. 

“The Supreme Council of Crimea declared the peninsula’s independence from Ukraine on March 11, as the Russian Foreign Ministry pointed to the secession of Kosovo from Serbia as legitimizing precedent for the impending referendum. . . . 

“The day after the referendum, Russia recognized Crimea as a sovereign state, and Crimean officials issued an appeal to be admitted into the Russian Federation with the status of a republic. An initial reunification treaty was signed the next day on March 18. Soldiers and demonstrators then stormed Ukrainian military bases across Crimea, including Ukraine’s naval headquarters in Sevastopol, killing an officer and arresting a Ukrainian admiral. Ukraine authorized soldiers to use their weapons defensively in response but later announced the withdrawal of its troops from the peninsula and the country’s withdrawal from the Commonwealth of Independent States.” 

When you consult these facts, you understand that Russia’s entire narrative about Ukraine is a pack of lies, distortions, and more lies. Russia initiated the conflict, plain and simple. Russian military forces entered Ukraine; Ukrainian military did not enter Russia. Ukrainian territory was stolen and gained by Russia; Ukraine took no land from its northern neighbor nor attempted to. Ukraine’s government was overthrown; Russia’s was strengthened. Ukraine was put on a defensive footing in its own nation, with hostile foreign mercenaries lurking about and snipers shooting at people; Russia doesn’t have to worry about Ukrainian troops, mercenaries, or snipers snooping around southern Russia. Some 100,000 Russian troops and hardware are amassed on the Ukrainian border; Ukraine has no predatory buildup of troops on Russia’s border. We could go on like this for a while. 

When a crisis happens, it’s good to ask “Cui bono?” or, in other words, “Who benefited?” Not always, but often, you will arrive at the proper conclusion by asking this simple question. And when we apply it to the Ukraine situation, we find only one actor that benefited – Russia. I think any intelligent person must admit that Russia began the conflict in 2013-2014 – not NATO. 

Some compare Putin’s annexation of Ukraine to Hitler’s so-called annexation of Austria or Czechoslovakia or his liberation of Danzig. There are, however, only superficial similarities. In Austria, the local government called for a national vote on joining Germany. In a legitimate vote, 98% of the Austrian people elected to do so. Nothing comparable happened in Crimea. In fact, the vaunted referendum was, as you’ve just seen described above, quite underhanded and contrived. There’s almost no comparison between Hitler’s anti-Marxist Germany and Putin’s KGB-controlled Russia. But I digress. 

What of the Minsk Accords that briefly brought about a cessation of fighting? Russia, ever pretending to be the white knight, claims that it has abided by the ceasefire (even while claiming it has no fighting men there – a clear contradiction) and that Ukraine – backed by NATO – has violated it, thus escalating the situation and portending war. Naturally, this is another Russian lie that their lapdogs in the West lap up. 

Writing for CEPA, Kurt Volker debunked Russia’s bunkum about the Minsk Accords. It’s hard not to quote the entire article, it’s so good. But here are a few paragraphs and snippets covering Voker’s nine points: 

“1. There are two Minsk Agreements, not just one. The first “Minsk Protocol” was signed on September 5, 2014. It mainly consists of a commitment to a ceasefire along the existing line of contact, which Russia never respected. By February 2015, fighting had intensified to a level that led to renewed calls for a ceasefire, and ultimately led to the second Minsk Agreement, signed on February 12, 2015. Even after this agreement, Russian-led forces kept fighting and took the town of Debaltseve six days later. The two agreements are cumulative, building on each other, rather than the second replacing the first. This is important in understanding the importance, reflected in the first agreement, of an immediate ceasefire and full monitoring by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), including on the Ukraine-Russia border, as fundamental to the subsequent package of agreements. 

“2. Russia is a Party to the Minsk Agreements. The original Minsk signatories are Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE. Russia is a protagonist in the war in Ukraine and is fully obliged to follow the deal’s terms. Despite that, however, Russia untruthfully claims not to be a party and only a facilitator — and that the real agreements are between Ukraine and the so-called “separatists,” who call themselves the Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples’ Republics (LPR and DPR), but are in fact Russian supplied and directed. 

“3. The LPR and DPR are not recognized as legitimate entities under the Minsk Agreements. The signatures of the leaders of the so-called Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples’ Republics were added after they had already been signed by Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE. They were not among the original signatories, and indeed Ukraine would not have signed had their signatures been part of the deal. There is nothing in the content or format of the Agreement that legitimizes these entities and they should not be treated as negotiating partners in any sense. Russia alone controls the forces occupying parts of eastern Ukraine. 

“4. Russia is in violation of the Minsk Agreements. The deals require a ceasefire, withdrawal of foreign military forces, disbanding of illegal armed groups, and returning control of the Ukrainian side of the international border with Russia to Ukraine, all of this under OSCE supervision. Russia has done none of this. . . .  

“5. Russian-led forces prevent the OSCE from accomplishing its mission in Donbas as spelled out in the Minsk Agreements. It is an unstated irony in Vienna — understood by every single diplomatic mission and member of the international staff — that Russia approves the mandate of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in Ukraine when it votes in Vienna, but then blocks implementation of that same mission on the ground in Ukraine. . . .  

“6. Ukraine has implemented as much of Minsk as can reasonably be done while Russia still occupies its territory . . . The Minsk Agreements do not require Ukraine to grant autonomy to Donbas, or to become a federalized state. It is Russia’s unique interpretation that the measures passed by Ukraine are somehow insufficient, even though the agreements do not specify what details should be included, and Ukraine has already complied with what is actually specified to the degree it can. 

“What is lacking in Ukraine’s passage of these political measures is not the legislation per se, but implementation — which Russia itself prevents by continuing to occupy the territory. For example, international legal norms would never recognize the results of elections held under conditions of occupation, yet that is exactly what Russia seeks by demanding local elections before it relinquishes control. . . . 

“7. Some form of neutral peacekeeping or policing force could help bridge between Russian control and Ukrainian control of the occupied territory – but Russia has rejected such proposals. Because of the impossibility of Ukraine implementing political measures while Russia still occupies its territory, the United States — as well as Ukraine, with support from others —proposed deployment of an UN-mandated peacekeeping force to Donbas, so that Russian forces could withdraw, and an UN-backed force could deploy, without an immediate hand-over to Ukrainian control . . . Russia, however, has consistently rejected such proposals, even labeling an UN-supported peacekeeping force a “military takeover” of the region, when of course it is Russia that has actually taken over the region militarily and unilaterally.  

“8. The US diplomatic role is essential. . . . 

“9. The only way to end the war is to change Russia’s calculations. Whether it is peacekeeping or police forces to provide local security; elections under international supervision; creating humanitarian corridors respected by all sides; unfettered freedom of movement for the OSCE’s SMM; or other ideas still to be explored, there is nothing preventing implementation of the Minsk Agreements other than Russia’s continued occupation. As soon as Russia chooses to end the war, the rest follows in swift order.” 

I implore you, dear reader, to stop believing Russia’s lies! As the aggressor, Russia spins everything to justify its behavior as defensive or noble or humanitarian. In fact, what they’re doing is invading and taking over a sovereign nation – a nation it has oppressed for a century. Ironically, it is Russia that most frequently brings up the Minsk Accords. I say we indulge them and take them to task about their repeated violations of the Accords. 

Furthermore, in December 2015, after the Minsk Accords were signed, Russia conducted cyberattacks against Ukraine, causing mass power outages affecting 230,0000 Ukrainians. It was the first time that cyberattacks had been used to take down a power grid – the very scenario the world Elite are currently warning about/threatening. They say it will be a cyber “pandemic” dwarfing the Coronahoax. 

An article gives us the scoop on the 2015 cyberattacks on Ukraine: 

“The attackers were especially clever and thought of everything, even launching a telephone denial-of-service attack against customer call centers to prevent customers from calling in to report the outage. 

“A cybersecurity expert from Dragos Security quoted in this 2016 Wired article, said the hack “was brilliant” and that “in terms of sophistication…what makes sophistication is logistics and planning and operations and…what’s going on during the length of it. And this was highly sophisticated.” He added: “What sophisticated actors do is they put concerted effort into even unlikely scenarios to make sure they’re covering all aspects of what could go wrong,” he says.  

“Per Kaspersky, BlackEnergy – the Trojan used in the Ukraine attack – began circulating in 2014. It was deployed specifically to conduct DDoS attacks, cyber espionage and information destruction attacks – and especially companies in the energy industry and those that use SCADA systems. 

“The attack on the Ukranian power grid is still considered one of the worst intrusions ever. And the case may not be closed just yet… 

“As stated upfront, almost immediately following the attack the Ukrainian government blamed Russia. Until very recently, no one has been officially accused. 

“On October 15, 2020, a federal grand jury in Pittsburgh (PA) returned an indictment charging six hackers, all of whom were residents and nationals of the Russian Federation (Russia) and officers in Unit 74455 of the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU), a military intelligence agency of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, also known as “Sandworm”.  

“The very same group may also be responsible for another massive attack, NotPetya, which caused nearly $1 billion in losses. 

“Sandworm may also be responsible for a series of cyber attacks intended to impact the now delayed 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo.” 

Russia, China, Iran, and their allies, run extensive cyberattack and cyberhacking operations against the West and against anyone who gets in their way. You can be sure that Russia and China will strike the United States before or at the outset of any future war, eviscerating our grid. In fact, Army Secretary Christine Warmouth recently warned that any war in Taiwan would lead to cyberattacks here at home that will specifically target critical infrastructure, transportation, and the power grid. 

An EMP strike would do similar damage to a massive cyberattack and would blast us back to the 1800s. The world Elite may also perpetrate a false-flag grid attack or terrorist attack, blaming it on Iran or another actor and justifying a war. Regardless, this incestuous, Satanic global cabal is the one responsible for the fractious fissures in society, is the one playing the nations off each other, and is the impetus behind the misery, wars, depressions, and plagues we’re forced to endure. 

Comparing our own fragile U.S. grid to Ukraine’s, a 2016 Wired article informed us: 

“The power wasn’t out long in Ukraine: just one to six hours for all the areas hit. But more than two months after the attack, the control centers are still not fully operational, according to a recent US report. Ukrainian and US computer security experts involved in the investigation say the attackers overwrote firmware on critical devices at 16 of the substations, leaving them unresponsive to any remote commands from operators. The power is on, but workers still have to control the breakers manually. 

“That’s actually a better outcome than what might occur in the US, experts say, since many power grid control systems here don’t have manual backup functionality, which means that if attackers were to sabotage automated systems here, it could be much harder for workers to restore power.” 

Brace yourself for a coming grid-down event. It’s coming. It’s going to be deliberate. And it’s going to rock society to its foundations. I again digress, but recommend you read two articles I’ve written on survival and preparedness, found here and here

Finally, setting aside Russia’s myriad violations of the Minsk Accords, I want to make one final point regarding Russian aggression. People are making a big hoopla about Republican Senator Roger Wicker’s comment saying a nuclear preemptive strike against Russia is on the table. Specifically, the Mississippi senator said: 

“Military action could mean that we stand off with our ships in the Black Sea, and we rain destruction on Russian military capability. It could mean that. It could mean that we participate, and I would not rule that out, I would not rule out American troops on the ground. We don’t rule out first use nuclear action.” 

While I admit it was a rash comment – and a strategically idiotic thing to say since no intelligent person telegraphs his plans to the enemy – this is the same exact thing Russia does constantly. Where is the ire from the pundits when Russia insanely threatens nuclear war on a routine basis? In every year of my life since I began studying communist Russia, Russia has threatened NATO or the United States with nuclear war. Russian generals, politicians both retired and current, and even KGB dictator Putin himself, have all incessantly threatened us with nuclear war. In 2015, Russia threatened little ol’ Denmark with nuclear war! Russia’s nuclear warnings are so frequent that Pentagon weapons expert Mark Schneider has said: “Threatening people with nuclear weapons is Russia’s national sport.” 

Russia isn’t the only one that dishes out nuclear threats like insults in a rap battle. China does as well. In January of 2021, China threatened Taiwan and the United States with “war” and “annihilation.” In June, Red China again threatened the U.S. Army and U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) with “total annihilation” if they dared defend Taiwan from their planned invasion. In August, China threatened “all-out war” against the United States and to “wipe out” U.S. forces if U.S. troops were confirmed to be stationed on Taiwan, which they now are in limited numbers. In September, the regime threatened Australia with nuclear war for joining the AUKUS alliance. And so on. 

The only reason most people don’t know about these maniacal threats from Russia and China is because the complicit, turncoat media doesn’t report on them. Yet, they exist and are the ultimate provocations from nations pretending to be innocent of aggression. Not two weeks ago, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov warned that Russia may deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Europe if NATO didn’t end its alleged eastward expansion – i.e. in Ukraine. Russia says it won’t deploy them, however, if NATO stops its so-called “aggression.” This psychotic, criminal behavior is like the mob threatening to burn down your store if you don’t pay them a percentage of your profits. They are the aggressors and no one can deny that. 

As I close this point and wrap up my article, I feel that a bleak warning from a Soviet bio-chemical weapons expert turned is in order. Igor Shaffid converted to Christianity from communism and wrote an intriguing book called Inside the Red Zone. He talked about the demonic nature of communism and how Satan is using Russia and China as weapons in his war against humanity. Heed his warning: 

“Anti-Christian regimes know that faith can protect a free will and a sound mind. That is why Lenin feared religious belief. Religion was not an opposition to his communist ideology; locking up a church door was effective enough, but faith rooted in the heart spread like wildfire, and that worried him. How could he get a society to worship him if they loved God more? This is why he called them “believers” and strove hard to stop those who preached the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Religion is never a threat, but relationship is. Lenin knew that people’s minds founded in faith and dedicated to Christ Jesus would be hard to conquer. . . . “Mind control is a great terror weapon bludgeoning today’s churches . . . Phony religious leaders use similar tactics to control assemblages within churches, as did . . . Stalin. “The worst mistake a Christian can make is in believing that all churches are safe zones. Not so. In Soviet Russia the government used churches to validate their constitution’s “freedom of religion,” using pastors hired by the KGB as a guise to fool the people. True believers were beaten and imprisoned, and few citizens were made aware of this. “The numerous false doctrines spreading across the world, and the extra-biblical, esoteric experiences that are introduced with these “new” revelations are a great preparatory tool for mass mind manipulation. This kind of seduction works well because feelings are involved. Forming an anti-christ government cannot be accomplished without mind control, and the church is the first to be targeted. . . . 

“. . . When the nations fight against the antichrist army, they won’t be reverting to outdated sabers and cannons. Nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare are the advanced weapons of this age, and it would not seem plausible that these weapons would be ignored during the great tribulation time. . . . 

“We should never become complacent. There are enough WMDs developed now to destroy this world, but Satan has not yet succeeded in his mission. There is unfinished business between him and God, and he plans on taking as many onto his side as he can. 

“How can he effectively get humankind to bow before him? Force and bullying hasn’t worked too well in the past, but he knows his most ingenious plan will work, and he has been perfecting it and bringing it to completion for hundreds of years. Deceptive love, false promises of peace, and mind control are his greatest tools in this plan. How does he accomplish this deception? By fooling people, of course, into thinking they can live in a good and peaceful world without wars or famine or terrorism. His devoted followers have pushed his deceptive agenda by participating in elite societies, clubs and orders – all of these different groups united secretly to bring about this socialistic new world order. . . . 

“When Satan’s real mask is removed at the end of time, then he will be exposed for what he is, the father of lies. Many nations will become confused and start fighting against him during the Battle of Armageddon. Satan’s evil that prompted humankind to develop the WMD will come in handy for him to destroy God’s creation. He knows that an ungodly nation that harbors nuclear/biological/chemical weapons, such as Russia, China, and North Korea, are excellent candidates for using this weaponry as a “power” to horsewhip other nations under their submission. I remember all too well in the Soviet army how I reveled in the fact that my country had so much power over all the other nations. Let us not be naïve; those thoughts are still alive in the Russian Federation. That is why the Russian military recently started refreshing its new generation of ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles), which have been lying in stockpiles for years, and have been placing them inside strategic controlled areas. Those that fight to do away with weapons of mass destruction will not succeed, because no one nation will give up its place for power – and the Day of Wrath will come, and nuclear war will be inevitable” (Igor V. Shafhid, Inside the Red Zone: Physical and Spiritual Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction, 83-85, 160-163). 

Yes, nuclear war is inevitable. I doubt it will happen as a result of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, which I believe will happen some time before the final nuclear struggle. I believe that struggle will break out in Asia, either as a result of war in Taiwan or on the Korean Peninsula. At any rate, the world is a powder keg and your insane not to quickly prepare for world war and societal collapse. It’s coming, as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow. 

In summation, Russia is engaged in an epic propaganda campaign to justify its hostility against Ukraine and NATO. In the first place, we must acknowledge that the “fall” of the Soviet Union was a ruse and that the communist conspiracy still rules in Moscow and throughout the world and that Russia and China will be used to expand this evil empire across the entire globe. Second, we must dismiss the lie that NATO surrounds Russia and is hemming them in, causing them to react to us. It’s the other way around – NATO’s moves are in reaction to Russian aggression and hybrid warfare against the Baltics states and Ukraine. Third, we must never lose sight of the fact that it was Russia which invaded Crimea, occupied it, and annexed it. It was Russian mercenaries who initiated war against Ukraine. And it is Russian forces which are now amassed on Ukraine’s border which have again brought Ukraine to the front of the news cycle. When war comes, it won’t be NATO’s fault – it will be KGB dictator Vladimir Putin’s fault.

Zack Strong,
December 29, 2021

The Ongoing Bolshevik Revolution

On Independence Day, 2020, I wrote a piece titled “The Ongoing American Revolution” outlining our People’s continuing struggle for Freedom and self-rule. Today, on the 104th anniversary of the Bolshevik coup d’état in Russia, I turn the tables and discuss the enemy’s ongoing war for world domination. 

On October 25, 1917, with financial support from ideological comrades and Jewish compatriots in the West, an international cadre of communist criminals seized control of the organs of power in Russia. Led by the career criminal Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known by his underworld alias “Lenin,” this vicious cabal of drugged-up, immoral, angry, atheistic, mostly Jewish revolutionaries, set up their base of operations in Russia. The formation of the Soviet Union was a huge step in a generations-old conspiracy that continues to operate at the present time.

In a 1920 article “Zionism versus Bolshevism,” Sir Winston Churchill correctly identified the primary moving force behind the Bolshevik Revolution: 

“The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire. 

“There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd) or of Krassin or Radek — all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.” 

There are two major points to be drawn from these rather blunt observations. First, Jews have played a pivotal role in communism from the beginning. Their influence was palpable and overt during the Bolshevik coup of 1917. More recent research has shown that Lenin was likely part Jewish and every scholar knows he spoke Yiddish and was married to a Jewess. But even if you want to discount him, the vast majority of his comrades in communist leadership positions were Jews. From Trotsky to Zinoviev and Kaganovich to Yagoda, and Kamenev to Sverdlov, Jews dominated the Soviet state apparatus, controlled the infamous secret police, and operated the dreadful GULAG.

So prominent were Jews in the early communist movement that a Russian satirist once mused: “Eleven anarchists were executed at the city jail; fifteen of them were Jews” (Anna Geifman, Thou Shalt Kill: Revolutionary Terrorism in Russia, 1894-1917, 34). No credible historian can deny the essential role Jews, and Jewish money, played in the Bolshevik Revolution and in the operation of the Soviet Union.  

Indeed, every communist movement in essentially every country of note has been led by Jews. Churchill named four of them – Leon Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemburg, and Emma Goldman. Others could be added, including the Soviet advisors who worked intimately with Mao Tse-tung in setting up Red China. The Israeli press has openly lauded them. So has the Chinese press. Wherever communism rears its demonic head, Jews are lurking nearby. 

Today, many of the powerful members in the world conspiracy – Soros, Kissinger, the Rothschilds, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Adelson, Strauss-Kahn, Kantor, Rosenberg, Greenblatt, etc. – are of the same ethnicity. You find them infesting the U.S. government from the Supreme Court to Congress to the president’s cabinet. More importantly, they dominate the media, the internet, Hollywood, Disney, the porn industry, banking, money lending, Wall Street, and other cultural institutions, financial bodies, and values-shaping mechanisms. Jewish organizations, such as the ruthless ADL, which is a branch of the Jewish Masonic order B’nai B’rith, are some of the chief organizers of BLM and Antifa riots and other anti-American spectacles (you’ll recall that Antifa was created by Jewish communists in Germany under orders of Stalin and operated as an armed wing of the Communist Party). 

Maybe most damning of all, Judeo-Bolshevism gave life to feminism, which has obliterated the family unit, fulfilling another of Marx’s infamous goals – the abolition of the family. The most famous feminists, like Betty Friedan, were card-carrying members of the Communist Party USA. Many of them, like Friedan (real name Bettye Naomi Goldstein), were also Jews. Gloria Steinem, Andrea Dworkin, and Robin Morgan may be added to the list. In fact, for a time in the early days, the majority of Communist Party USA members were women – radical feminists. Red feminism plunged the knife into the heart of the traditional, patriarchal American family, foreshadowing the fall of America we’re living through. 

The LGBT movement, which has joined in the assault on morality, marriage, and family, is also, you guessed it, a communist front with many Jews playing prominent roles. Henry “Harry” Hay, a card-carrying member of the CPUSA, created the first homosexual organization in the United States – the Mattachine Society. He also created or influenced the Radical Faeries and the pedophile group North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). 

Jews were crucial in normalizing homosexuality throughout the Western world. Cross-dressing and homosexual Bolsheviks were not uncommon in Soviet Russia. Jews also transformed Weimar Germany into the most degenerate hellhole on earth until Hitler banned their filth. Throughout the 20th Century, Jewish activists were influential in forming homosexual advocacy groups. Jews created the international, D.C.-based “World Congress of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Jews” or “The World Congress: Keshet Ga’avah,” in 1980. 

More recently, it was Jewish influence which got homosexual marriage recognized in the United States, just as it was Jewish influence which banned God from schools in the past. I quote from the Jewish Chronicle

“On 26 June 2013, the Supreme Court struck down the federal bar on same-sex marriage. At the centre of the landmark case were a Jewish couple – Edie Windsor and Thea Spyer – and their suit was pursued by a Jewish lawyer, Robbie Kaplan. Two years later, and two days before the 46th anniversary of the Stonewall riots, the Supreme Court legalised gay marriage throughout the United States. In both cases, the three Jewish justices – Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan – were critical in delivering the 5-4 rulings.” 

The porn industry, which plagues the world, is also totally dominated by Jews. From the beginning, the biggest pornographers have nearly all been Jewish. The “Walt Disney of Porn,” Reuben Sturman, who controlled porn in America several decades back, was, obviously, a Jew. The prominent pornographic websites are Jewish-controlled. Anyone who has encountered this scourge as I unfortunately have knows how destructive it is and how it’s one of the many things greasing the skids of the advancing New World Order. 

Yes, cultural Marxism in all its forms is a Judeo-communist invention. It’s sometimes attributed to the Frankfurt School which fled Hitler’s Germany in exile. But the entire “school” was comprised of Jewish Marxists. They set up shop in the United States and have used U.S. resources to spread their cultural corruption around the word, destroying morality, families, and civilizations.

The second point we should take form Churchill’s words is the most important; namely, that the communist conspiracy did not begin in 1917 or even with Karl Marx. Rather, the communist cabal can be traced back to “Spartacus-Weishaupt.” The Weishaupt here referred to was Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Order of Illuminati on May 1, 1776. “Spartacus” was his secret codename. I find it intriguing that Churchill, who later was seduced to the very dark side he condemned earlier in his life, had the wherewithal to link communism and Illuminism. This is the real key! 

Communism didn’t spring out of Marx’s mad mind. It didn’t come from The Communist Manifesto. Its origin reaches farther back. It may be of interest to the reader, however, to learn that Marx was hired by a secret society to write his Manifesto. The group was called the League of the Just. In 1836, this League had split form an earlier group on the continent called the League of Outlaws. Follow this group back and you eventually discover the Jacobins who fomented the French Revolution and the Order of Illuminati which puppeteered the whole thing. 

In 1847, the League of the Just asked Marx to write a document expressing its goals and beliefs. Using the Zionist Moses Hess’s earlier writings as an inspiration (Hess is the man who converted Marx to communism and a major mover in the Zionist movement), Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote their Manifesto. The League then changed its name to the Communist League and published The Communist Manifesto in February 1848. 

Down through the decades, the Communist League fomented chaos and engaged in criminality, changing its name many times. Eventually, it called itself the Social Democratic Workers’ Party. This organization was headed by the same Lenin mentioned earlier. Lenin caused a split between his more radical faction, which he called Bolsheviks, and the less radical – though also revolutionary – sect known as Mensheviks. It was the Mensheviks who led the abortive 1905 revolution in Russia. It was Lenin’s Bolsheviks, joined by many Mensheviks including Trotsky, who led the Bolshevik coup that enslaved Russia in 1917. 

As Churchill noted, Nesta Webster is one of the great thinkers who has linked the Illuminati to communism. In her book World Revolution, she wrote: 

“Reduced to a simple formula the aims of the Illuminati may be summarized in the following six points: 

1. Abolition of Monarchy and all ordered Government. 
2. Abolition of private property. 
3. Abolition of inheritance. 
4. Abolition of patriotism. 
5. Abolition of the family (i.e. of marriage and all morality, and the institution of the communal education of children). 
6. Abolition of all religion. 

“Now it will surely be admitted that the above forms a programme hitherto unprecedented in the history of civilization. Communistic theories had been held by isolated thinkers or groups of thinkers since the days of Plato, but no one, as far as we know, had ever yet seriously proposed to destroy everything for which civilization stands. Moreover, when, as we shall see, the plan of Illuminism as codified by the above six points has continued up to the present day to form the exact programme of the World Revolution, how can we doubt that the whole movement originated with the Illuminati or with secret influences at work behind them?” (Nesta Webster, World Revolution: The Plot Against Civilisation, 22-23). 

What learned person can read these aims and then deny that communism and Illuminism are one and the same and that this plan is being doggedly pursued and is near fulfillment in our day? 

Sometimes people split hairs and fall into the trap of trying to separate the Western branch of socialists from the Eastern communists. This is a fool’s errand since both branches are attached to the same tree. The Illuminati is that tree. Truth be told, even the Order of Illuminati is an appendage of a larger fusion of evil that may simply be termed the Church of the Devil or Babylon the Great. However, it is the branch of branches – and the most luscious fruit it has yet produced is communism. 

You can trace the worst elements of East and West – the Bolsheviks and the Fabian Socialists respectively – back to Karl Marx and the League of the Just; that is, to the Illuminati. The founders of Fabianism were diehard Marxists who knew Marx personally. Marx was actively involved in the Socialist Leagues that became popular in the West. The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, obviously, were his adherents, too. It was they, with Fabian-banker-Skull & Bones-CFR-Committee of 300 help, who later toppled Russia. 

These same forces then started World War II which destroyed Europe, eliminated the anti-communist states of Germany, Japan, and Italy, led to the creation of the United Nations and European Union, and set the stage for the fall of China. It was because of intrigue by Western members of the conspiracy that Eastern communists were able to conquer China, turning it into the biggest communist base camp. Read about the tragic betrayal of China here

The two groups are incestuous and cannot honestly be separated. Yes, each wing of the conspiracy would rather be in charge and absolutely will mobilize militarily against the other when it sees an opportunity, but both believe in the same ideology, push the same plan, serve the same Dark Master, and achieve the same devastating results. 

The opening scene of “The Dark Knight” illustrates the relationship of the great power centers – the United States, Russia, and China – to each other. You’ll recall that the scene depicted a bank heist. After each member of the Joker’s crew completed his task, his partner turned to him and shot him. The Joker had given each member the same instruction. In the end, the Joker shot his final accomplish and was the last man standing with the stolen loot. 

Satan is the Joker in this analogy and his accomplices are the hijacked governments of Russia, China, and the United States – among others. In his frenzied march toward world domination, Satan intends on playing his dupes off against each other. If he has to eliminate one, two, or all three of them after they’ve assisted him in his great goal, so be it so long as he stands supreme with the loot at the end of the day. 

Said otherwise, regardless of which side wins the fast-approaching world war, the Illumined internationalists believe their agents will be in charge. Their agents control the governments of Russia, China, and the United States. They control Israel, Iran, and Turkey. They control Britain, France, and Germany. They control every nation on earth to greater or lesser extent. They control international finance, the media, most churches, most universities and schools, and many of the biggest corporations. Again, I say, if some part of the force – even a whole nation or continent – must be sacrificed for the Order to finally seize total power, so be it. 

Let me be very clear about this. It’s not “the Jews” or “the Russians” or any other race, nationality, or ethnicity that is the enemy. Satan is the enemy along with all those who have elected to serve him. This includes a highly disproportionate number of Jews, as shown above, but it also includes so-called Christians, Muslims, Hindus, agnostics, atheists, pagans, occultists, New Agers, Theosophists, Luciferians, and so on. 

The Jews, once they’re cleansed by fire in the Battle of Armageddon, have a prophetic destiny to play as part of the House of Israel. Israel is crucial in the Lord’s Plan. This Israel isn’t the physical land of Israel or the Zionist state, but those who have come into the covenant of Jesus Christ by faith, repentance, and baptism by proper Priesthood authority. I want it firmly fixed in your mind that I don’t condemn the members of any race or religion out of hand. But I do rebuke and condemn the communists and Luciferians of any creed, race, religion, and nation who labor to destroy Faith, Families, and Freedom. 

I heartily endorse a quote by Ezra Taft Benson. He admonished: 

“We must not become confused over side issues. Our enemy is not the Catholic, not the Protestant, not the Negro, not the white man, not the Jew, not the Gentile, not employers, not employees, not the wealthy, not the poor, not the worker, and not the employer. Our mortal enemies are the Satanic Communists and those who prepare the path for them” (Ezra Taft Benson, “A Race Against Time,” BYU address, December 10, 1963). 

The same psychopaths who set up the Soviet Union and Red China are the ones who infest our government today. The ones who murdered 150+ million human beings with bullets, famine, and forced labor, are the ones now telling you to take your vaccines, drink your fluoridated water, eat your GMO food, muzzle your face with oxygen-inhibiting masks, close your business, silence your “racist” and “anti-Semitic” speech, kneel before your Black Lives Matter masters, profess your “white guilt,” accept tranny admirals in the military, give up your self-defense weapons, accept a stolen election, and submit to totalitarian rule of your life. Are we stupid enough to follow these pied pipers to the gallows and stick our neck in the noose? 

If people only realized that the hell we see being unleashed today is being carried out by the same nefarious figures who created the Order of Illuminati, fomented the French Revolution, started WWI, overthrew Russia, carried out unequalled reigns of terror the horrors of which would shock the average person into incoherence, initiated WWII and framed the anti-communists, concocted the UN, trumped up the Cold War, waged numerous hot wars, assassinated Kennedy, gave us feminism and LGBT, killed hundreds of millions of babies in human sacrifice called “abortion,” destroyed the patriarchal family, fomented racial division beyond anything seen in the past, took down the Twin Towers on 9/11, released a bioweapon to scare humanity into accepting a vaccine that is itself a far worse bioweapon, and so much more, we could finally awaken to our awful situation and fight back. 

I now quote a few fitting lines from my introduction to my book A Century of Red

“[H]onesty and integrity demand that we expose conspiracy and haul the wicked acts of evil men into the light of truth. Only by doing this – that is, by admitting and accepting the truth about international conspiracy and exposing it for the world to see – can we begin to heal our global wounds. 

“Healing any malady requires a knowledge of its root cause. Without this knowledge, all efforts to heal the problem will ultimately fail. A medicine might treat the outward symptoms of a disease, but unless it is targeted at the underlying cause of the symptoms, the virus will continue to live and spread. Society must acknowledge and directly address conspiracy. If we do not, our problems will grow worse with each passing year no matter who is in the White House, no matter how much money we throw at the problem, and no matter how sincerely we wish the pain would stop. We will either root out the cancerous conspiracies that have entrenched themselves in every corner of our Republic, or they will destroy us.” 

It may be too late and too little to avoid the collapse of America and world cataclysm, but many millions have been jolted awake by the birth pangs of the New World Order. The one-world communist state is here. It’s not fully implemented yet, but it’s in its endgame and is forming fearfully fast all around us. The Bolshevik world revolution is in full swing. The communist conspiracy has never been more powerful and prevalent.

To end, I quote a man who has been hotly demonized, yet whose voice of warning about Satanic communism was piercingly poignant and whose words deserve to be heard: 

“Bolshevism, which is in reality an attack on the world of the spirit, pretends to be intellectual itself. Where circumstances demand, it comes as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. But underneath the false mask which it here and there assumes, there are always the satanic forces of world destruction. And where it has had the opportunity of practising its theories it has created “The Paradise of the Workers and Peasants,” in the shape of a fearful desert of starving and hungering people. If we are to take the word of its doctrine then we find a terrible contradiction between its theory and its practice. Its theory is glowing and grandiose but it carries poison in its attractive gloss. Over against this, what we have from it in reality is terrible and forbidding. This is shown in the millions of sacrifices which have been made in honour of it, through executions with the sword, the axe or the hangman’s rope or hunger. . . .  

“. . . [Bolshevism is a] world disease . . .  

“Murder of individuals, murder of hostages and mass murder are the favourite means applied by Bolshevism to get rid of all opposition to its propaganda. . . .  

“We have thus before our eyes a full picture of this fearful and harrowing mass terrorisation which is only approximately paralleled by even the most bloodcurdling examples of war or revolution that are recorded in the history of the world. This is the actual system of bloodshed and terror and death which is carried out by hysterical and criminal political maniacs who would have it copied in every country and among every people with the same terrorising practices, in so far as they might find the possibility of doing so. . . .  

“Bolshevism is the declared enemy of all nations and of all religions and of all human civilisation. The World Revolution is now, as always, its acknowledged and proclaimed goal” (Joseph Goebbels, speech, September 13, 1935, “Communism With the Mask Off”). 

Rise, dear reader, in defense of our Faith, Families, and Freedom! Rise in resistance to the one-world police state! Rise in defiance of Satanic communism! 

Zack Strong, 
October 24, 2021 

Christian Love is an Obstacle

In their 2018 exposé, Forbidden Facts shockingly revealed:

“Did you know that the origin of Valentine’s Day comes from a red plot to weaken Western defenses on a predictable day, to aid with an invasion? It is not a coincidence that we are giving RED roses on this holiday!”

Valentine’s Day is a Bolshevik conspiracy! . . . Or is it? Communist plots are a dime a dozen and enemy agents really do lurk around every corner. Fortunately, though, Valentine’s Day is not one of their schemes. Cupid was not commissioned by the Kremlin; you don’t have to fear the sweet sting of his arrow. Forbidden Facts was simply practicing its satirical skills. However, this satire hits closer to home than the authors are likely aware. The communists actually do have a plot to crush the very notion of love and replace it with unrestrained hatred.

The Soviet chief of “education,” Anatoly Lunacharsky, gave piercing insight into the communist mentality when he raved:

“We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best of them must be considered our worst enemies. Christian love is an obstacle to the development of the revolution. Down with love of one’s neighbor! What we want is hate. . . . Only then can we conquer the universe” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Communist, 308).

To hate is what the Soviets actively taught their subjects to do. They used schools as indoctrination centers. In these brainwashing factories, Christians were depicted by their Judeo-Bolshevik overlords as dangerous radicals and threats to justice, peace, and unity. The controlled press also kept up a constant barrage of virulent anti-Christian diatribes.

Lunarcharsky was not alone in his Satanic sentiments. In the Congressional Record, we find this blunt quotation from Bolshevik dictator Vladimir Lenin: “We must hate – hatred is the basis of communism” (Introduced into the Congressional Record April 12, 1933 by Senator Arthur R. Robinson, 1539). Lenin is also said to have remarked: “Children must be taught to hate their parents if they are not communists.”

Lenin was a sadist. He was cruel and brutal. He relished the suffering of his fellow human beings. He forced them into starvation, cannibalism, concentration camps, slavery, and the killing fields all to further his Marxist agenda of world domination. We have this anecdote from socialist Bertrand Russell who visited Lenin in Moscow:

“When I put a question to him about socialism in agriculture, he explained with glee how he had incited the poorer peasants against the richer ones, ‘and they soon hanged them from the nearest tree – ha! ha! ha!’ His guffaw at the thought of those massacred made my blood run cold” (Richard Pipes, A Concise History of the Russian Revolution, 209).

Hatred for others and a glaring lack of compassion for suffering are common traits among the communists. Stalin was particularly devoid of compassion and love toward others. He once described his thought process for murdering his associates:

“When I have to say good-bye to someone, I picture this person on all fours and he becomes disgusting. Sometimes I feel attached to a person who should be removed for the good of the cause. What do you think I do? I imagine this person s***ting, exhaling stench, farting, vomiting – and I don’t feel sorry for this person. The sooner he stops stinking on this earth, the better. And I cross this person out of my heart” (Richard Wurmbrand, Marx & Satan, 52).

“Callous disregard” for others is too light a description. Rather, “Satanic hatred” is perhaps more apt. When we cross others out of our hearts and cease to love them, anything and everything cruel and degrading becomes possible.

The Jewish Soviet propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg learned his craft well from Lenin, Lunacharsky, and Stalin. During World War II, he wrote a screed titled “Убей!” or “Kill!” It was distributed to the rapacious Red Army hordes on the front lines in 1942. In it, Ehrenberg encouraged the troops with similar thoughts to those voiced by Stalin:

“Germans are not humans. Henceforth, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. Henceforth, the word ‘German’ unloads a gun. We have nothing to say. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day . . . If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime . . . If you have already killed a German, then kill another one – there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed. Kill the Germans! – This is what the old woman asks. Kill the Germans! – This is what the child cries for. Kill the Germans! – This is what your motherland demands . . . Kill!”

As recently as 2018, the Israeli news outlet Haaretz had the audacity to call this murderous order “poetry.” The poetry of hell, perhaps. It was, to any normal person, a command to destroy human life, to cross love out of one’s soul, to act like a devil.

A Soviet poster calling on everyone to kill Germans.

Having lived in Russia from 2006-2008, I can personally attest that foreigners are routinely cursed at with the term “Немцы!” or “Germans!” Ehrenberg’s foul words not only enticed the Red Army of the Second World War to gangrape two million German women and brutally murder millions of other innocent Germans, but still wield influence over many in the modern Russian generation.

What we’re dealing with in all of these examples is not mere disdain, but pathological, violent, savage hatred. Remember, “hatred is the basis of communism,” according to Lenin. But why did the Bolsheviks hate their enemies so virulently – virulently enough to murder them to the tune of 160 million or more? And why are they so enraged to this day that they’re willing to start wars, release plagues, crash economies, murder their opposition, and repress billions of souls? I mention but two reasons.

First, and most importantly, communists then as now are filled with demonic hatred because they have rejected God. “God is love,” as John told us (1 John 4:8). To reject Him is to reject His attributes such as love, mercy, and compassion. Many high-level communists are not only atheists and Darwinistic humanists, they’re outright Satanists. They’re literal anti-Christs – high priests to their Dark Master. They know God exists and they resent Him and wish to crush Him and His followers.

Now and then, communists admitted their true affiliation. Karl Marx, the Jewish Satanist, wrote, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above” (Wurmbrand, Marx & Satan, 7). A Soviet general once told a captive Christian priest one of the most intriguing things I’ve ever read. He said: “We are Satan’s elite, but you, are you God’s elite?” (Wurmbrand, Marx & Satan, 74). When the Bolshevik savages tortured Christians, they sometimes branded them with pentagrams or forced them to deny Christ before killing them. Why would communists make these hapless Christians deny a being they don’t believe exists? Is it perhaps that they do know He exists, but that they hate Him and, on orders from the Dragon, make war against His followers? (Revelation 12:17)

The second reason why communists are so filled with hatred is that many of them are Jews. This is not “anti-Semitism,” it’s historical fact. Karl Marx, the author of The Communist Manifesto, was a Jew. Marx was converted to communism by the Jew Moses Hess, who was an early founder of Zionism. Hess also converted Engels from Christianity to communism. Lenin was part-Jewish, was married to a Jewess, and spoke Yiddish. Stalin was married to a Jewess. Most of the early Bolshevik higher-ups, from Trotsky to Radek to Zinoviev, were Jews or married to Jewesses. Even in foreign lands, from Spain to Hungary to Mexico to Germany, Jews led local communist movements and uprisings. And of course these radicals received significant funding from Jewish bankers and businessmen abroad (synagogues around the world also raised money to support the Bolshevik coup in 1917). Again, this isn’t a smear; it’s a statistic.

Don’t doubt for one moment that the Jewish upbringing of the early Soviet leaders didn’t play a major role in their enduring hatred of Christians. It absolutely did. They particularly hated the Christian tsars and the Russian Orthodox Church because Jews had been, in the distant past, relegated to second-class status within the Russian Empire. This had changed, however, and Jews were allowed to enter normal professions within the Empire, often coming to totally dominate many sectors long before the Soviet days. In fact, so ironclad was their control that organic pogroms sometimes erupted for the ruthless way Jews took advantage of non-Jews. Their grievances, therefore, were ancient history and largely unfounded. Indeed, it was the average Russian peasant who had a real grievance against the minority Jewish population that came to power over them.

The Bolshevik leaders were mostly Jews, yes, but predominantly secular or Satanic Jews; that is, non-practicing. But they grew up in the materialistic, eye-for-an-eye Jewish culture and some certainly imbibed Judaism’s occult teachings found in the Kabbalah and Talmud. If you have never researched the anti-Christ nature of the Babylonian Talmud and the Kabbalah (specifically, see Sabbatean Kabbalism), do so. Those Jews who divorced themselves totally from their religious roots adopted either Gnosticism (founded by the Jew Simon the Sorcerer) or communism as their religion, their purpose, their mission. The promise of a worldwide communist state became their desired utopia – their new “promised land.”

These amoral Judeo-Marxists ran the infamous GULAG. They headed the Soviet intelligence apparatus. They dominated in leading positions within the bureaucracy and leadership organs. For many of them, their newfound power was used to exact what they considered “revenge” against Christians for the way Christians had supposedly treated them for centuries.

Nuns and priests were singled out for horrific defilement, sexual abuse, torture, and slaughter. Christians were stripped of their churches, which were often turned into museums promoting atheism and paganism after they had been looted of all valuables. A favorite Bolshevik method of tortuous murder was crucifixion – a form of mockery against the Christian population. Christian scriptures were taken and bastardized by the Soviets. For instance, the Lord’s Prayer was rewritten as a worship of the USSR with words like: “Our Party which rulest in the Soviet Union, Hallowed be thy name.” Nothing was too crass, blasphemous, or evil for this lot of vengeful Soviet Jews.

Whether because of cultural revenge or because of spiritual sickness, the fact is that the communists made a concerted effort to preach hate and crush love. They hated “Christian love” and recognized it as a legitimate obstacle to their global revolution. Instead of love and happiness, communists sought the misery of all mankind. They were like their father the Devil, who was a murderer and liar from the beginning (John 8:44). Because they were anti-Christ, they were also inevitably anti-love and opposed to all the goodness, geniality, selflessness, mercy, and honor that flows from the loving heart.

When we reject the radiant allure of love and wholesome relationships, we begin the tragic trek towards godlessness and communist thinking. Society is slipping into the Marxist morass because it is forgetting how to love. Our hearts are growing cold. We’re becoming numb towards others and even towards things of beautify, light, and truth.

This Valentine’s Day is the perfect opportunity to take a gut check and evaluate how well we qualify as the Savior’s disciples. He said: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35). Yes, Valentine’s Day is the perfect time to recommit to love of God and love of one’s neighbor. It’s the perfect time to rekindle the flame in our relationships and to extend the hand of friendship to strangers, mercy to those who have offended us, and love to all we meet.

According to the legends, Emperor Claudius Gothicus of Rome outlawed marriage because he needed soldiers, but married people were often excused from military service. A Christian named Valentinus, or Valentine, supposedly disobeyed the emperor’s edict, secretly marrying couples and promoting the institution of marriage, the ideal of chastity, and the virtue of Christian love. For his rebellious deed, Valentine was executed on February 14 in the year 269 A.D. In later centuries, the mythological character Cupid (aka Eros) and various pagan traditions were blended with the story of “Saint” Valentine to produce Valentine’s Day.

The story of Valentine performing secret marriages may well indeed be embellished. We have very little actual, verifiable information about this man or the reasons for his martyrdom. Several accounts do, however, tell of one Christian named Valentine who was arrested and murdered in Rome. Regardless of the reasons or the particulars, the Catholic Church made Valentine’s Day, though unknown by that name until centuries later, a formal celebration in 496 A.D.

In that year, Pope Gelasius I ordained this holiday. The reasons he did so are obscured by rumors and myths. One of the prevalent theories, though likely only partially true, is that Valentine’s Day was created to offset the Roman pagan holiday of Lupercalia. The Feast of Lupercalia was in part a fertility festival. During this three-day revelry, the Luperci, priests of Lupus, the she-wolf that legend says nurtured Rome’s founders Romulus and Remus, performed ritual animal sacrifices promoting both fertility and purification.

This article was never meant to be an exhaustive history, so, in essence, we can say that Valentine’s Day is a melange of Catholic religious veneration, Roman paganism, and more modern effusions of love by Chaucer and others. Consumerism has shaped the holiday in its own image, turning it into a day to spend money on chocolates, flowers, fancy dinners, jewelry, and sappy movies. Modern hedonists also use the holiday to promote their amoral ways, transforming love into lust.

This Valentine’s Day, set back the Adversary’s agenda by remembering to love. To love is not to lust or use others for your own amusement. Love is a Christlike quality. Love is the most powerful force in the galaxy because “love is of God” and “God is love” (1 John 4:7-8). We need this power more now than ever before.

Love changes people. Love uplifts. Love animates. Love lets light into the soul. Love casts out fear and pumps courage through the veins. Love motivates us to self-sacrifice for that which we love – for our Faith, our Families, and our Freedom.

As the wise Professor Dumbledore once said, we are often protected by our ability to love. Love is the most powerful kind of magic in existence; the prime motivating force in the universe. God loved us so He sent His Son Jesus Christ (John 3:16-18). Christ loved us and laid down His life for us. Each drop of His holy blood is a drop of divine love that can heal, cleanse, and save.

Without love, we’re nothing as individuals or societies. Without love, we walk in darkness. Without love, life is bland, undesirable, and a constant drudgery that leads us into the downward spiral of selfishness. Without love, we have no chance of defeating communism, the rising tide of societal filth, or the machinations of the Evil One. To the Devil, Christian love is the supreme obstacle. If we have this pristine love in our souls, he has no power over us.

Dear reader, we need love! This Valentine’s Day, let’s let love into our lives. Said otherwise, this holiday, let’s let God into our hearts. When we love God, He loves us and manifests Himself to us in a million beneficial ways (John 14:21, 23). Let’s love God. Let’s love our spouses and families. Let’s love our neighbors. Let’s love truth, beauty, light, success, virtue, honor, righteousness, and Liberty. In a word, let’s love life and live in love!

Zack Strong,

February 13, 2021

Introducing . . . Red Alert

UPDATE: In January 2022, I changed Red Alert to once-a-month and lowered the price to $12.15 yearly.

This January, I launched a subscription-based newsletter called Red Alert. Red Alert is an anti-communist, anti-corruption, anti-conspiracy report issued once weekly. It discusses both the current and historical intrigues and machinations of the global communist conspiracy and its myriad of front groups. This article is written to inform you about Red Alert and encourage you to subscribe and join the growing Red Alert family at https://redalertnewsletter.com/.

What do you get when you subscribe to Red Alert? Is it worth $35 a year? Only you can decide the latter question, but let me explain the first. Each newsletter contains six elements:

1) A primary, long-form article that dives deeply into a specific topic. That topic may shine the spotlight on an historical event related to the origin, rise, and legacy of communism, such as the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, or may cover current events that tie into the machinations of global communism, such as the Great Reset or the communist coup that toppled President Donald Trump. So far, I’ve covered only current events, though I plan to start introducing historical flashbacks soon. The four published issues of Red Alert have been titled: “What is Communism?” “Communist Coup,” “Weaponized Racism,” and “America Will Never be a Socialist Country – or Will She?”

2) An update on the advance of cultural Marxism. In particular, I deal with the feminist and LGBT assault on families, the home, and traditional moral values. In Red Alert No. 1, for instance, I talked about feminist Jessa Crispin who laments that today’s feminists are not radical enough for her anti-family agenda. She raged that the Coronahoax lockdowns have brought women back into the home instead of at the office or workplace where they belong. She called for the destruction of the institution of marriage, the overthrow of the “patriarchy,” and so on.

3) A section on recent updates from Putin’s Russia. For instance, in Red Alert No. 2, I covered the Russian roll-out of the terrible new ICBM, the RS-28 Sarmat, or Satan 2. I noted the Russians’ boast that the Satan 2 could supposedly destroy an area the size of Texas or France.

4) A section on Chinese schemes and international moves. For example, in Red Alert No. 3, I discussed China’s irrational rage at Taiwan’s introduction of a new passport that made it very clear Taiwan is a separate nation. The Reds called this impudence “seccessionism.” Additionally, in response to a planned diplomatic trip to Taiwan by former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Kelly Craft, Beijing threatened both Taiwan and the United States with a war of “annihilation.” Yes, literally.

5) A recommendation of a book or other information source. I usually share an excerpt from the books I recommend to give you the flavor of the content. As one example, in Red Alert No. 2, I recommended Unrestricted Warfare by the Chinese military colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui. This book outlines the unconventional tactics, from terrorism to cyber warfare to information warfare, that China uses to attack its enemies – primarily the United States.

6) A sourced quote from a communist, ex-communist, or ideological comrade, usually relevant to the topic of the main article in each issue. To wit, in Red Alert No. 3, I quoted Marxist professor Kamau Kambon who said in a public forum: “We have to exterminate white people.”

Altogether, through four issues, I’ve presented over 28,000 words worth of information – an average of 7,000 words per issue! These are not pithy, haphazardly-thrown-together articles. They’re detailed, in-depth pieces that try to really show you how the topic fits into the overall Satanic scheme against our Faith, Families, and Freedom.

And that’s what faces humanity – a Satanic conspiracy. The time for mincing words is past. We must either acknowledge that we’re under full-scale assault by a demonic adversary hell-bent on destroying everything good in life, or we will lose. Red Alert seeks to educate and intellectually arm you for this struggle. While providing a wealth of details, quotes, and sources, the most important aspect of my analysis is that I really show you the broad principles and big-picture perspective that are necessary to comprehend in order to make sense of the individual moving parts.

A craftsman might be an expert in woodworking, but that doesn’t mean he knows how to build a house; it doesn’t mean he has the full blueprint. By analogy, you can find people who understand specific aspects of conspiracy better than I do or who have more expertise about a certain thing, such as James Perloff on the Council on Foreign Relations or G. Edward Griffin on the Federal Reserve cartel. But, in my self-confident opinion, there aren’t many people who understand the big picture as well as I do; who see how these disparate parts connect together into one whole; who truly understand the nature of this is spiritual warfare.

To me, comprehending the big picture is the key. If you’re an expert on the Rothschild dynasty, but don’t have a clue how the Rothschild fortune has been used to mold world events or to which end it is mobilized, your knowledge amounts to little more than a set of fun factoids. But if you know that the Rothschilds are Sabbatean Kabbalists who have united their fortune with the wealth of other occult-minded families and entities, such as the Order of Illuminati or the Warburgs, and use it to lead humanity headlong into a one-world state crowned by a one-world Luciferian religion, then all those “factoids” have real value.

The key to it all, in my opinion, is knowing that Satan is the head of the conspiracy against mankind. His top echelon of earthly high priests worship him. He personally gives them instructions and they follow his blueprint for the conquest of the globe. The ideas and institutions of communism have proven to be their chief weapon in this fight. This becomes easier to comprehend when you understand that communism is actually the dogma formulated by Adam Weishaupt and pushed forward by the Order of Illuminati. As I’ve written in this newsletter:

“The Communist League, under that name, came into existence in 1847 less than a year prior to the publication of The Communist Manifesto. But the organization, the “secret society,” existed long before. The previous name it went by was the League of the Just, sometimes rendered League of Just Men. If you trace the pedigree of this secret society, you go back to the League of Outlaws, among others, and eventually arrive at the Order of Illuminati. Yes, the Communist League is a direct descendant of the Illuminati!

“When you realize that communism is Illuminism – the identical ideology of the Bavarian Illuminati – it unlocks your comprehension of the global conspiracy network. From this movement, founded in 1776 by Adam Weishaupt and expanded to include international bankers, certain sects of Freemasons, and radical Jews in 1782, has sprung nearly all the organizations that currently assist one another in suppressing Freedom around the globe: The communists; Fabian Socialists; Bilderburgers; Committee of 300; Council on Foreign Relations; Club of Rome; United Nations; BRICS; etc.”

And again, I’ve explained:

“Karl Marx was hired to write The Communist Manifesto by a shadowy group known as the League of the Just. The League of the Just was an Illuminati front group; or, perhaps you could say, an offshoot from the Illuminati. The League changed its name to the Communist League and published Marx’s Manifesto. The group went through various name changes until Lenin came to head the group and used it, with Western money, to overthrow Russia and create the Soviet Union. As this group was evolving and growing in Eastern Europe, Marx launched another movement that remained largely in the West – the Socialist International. Out of the Socialist International sprang Fabian Socialism, which is the particular brand of socialism that has wrapped its tentacles around the United States.

“When you look at mainstream socialism, then, you find that it is the brainchild of Karl Marx and the Illuminati offshoot the League of the Just. Thus, both communism and socialism come from the same source. Both philosophies preach the same principles: World government; domination by the state; abolition or state control of private property; the creation of a welfare state; etc. That socialism works by less invasive means to come to power is of no consequence. Both socialism and communism have the same impact on Liberty.”

It is these types of powerful links and connections I draw in Red Alert. One may study and write about communism his entire life (and many have) and not realize that the entire scheme was concocted decades before Marx by the Illuminati. Subscribers to my newsletter get this sort of information right from the start. Having this umbrella of information to work under is invaluable and helps put the more minute details into proper perspective.

In addition to the weekly newsletter, I upload a video report each week as part of the subscription package. In this Sit-Rep, or situation report, I talk about sometimes random and sometimes specific things. These videos are less focused and more extemporaneous. In the future, I’d like to develop my format and setting to make it into a more professional production. I’ve heard from more than one subscriber that they love this feature as much, if not more, than the actual newsletter.

Finally, on the last week of every month, I plan to host a live online event. I haven’t hammered out the specifics yet, such as which platform I’ll use or how precisely I’ll conduct them, but I envision these events as a way to connect more with my audience. Whether it’s a live chat, a Zoom conference, or a teleconference call, I want to develop stronger relationships and connections with like-minded patriots, answer questions if any arise, and discuss these topics more deeply.

Now that you know what you get when you subscribe to Red Alert, you can decide whether it is worth $35/year to you. To me, information is power. I thirst for knowledge. I always want to dig beneath the surface and understand why things happen. I want to understand my enemy so I know how to defeat him and safeguard my family. People who fall into the same category will likely find Red Alert a useful resource.

I close by sharing a paragraph from Red Alert No. 2 which sets the stakes of the vicious struggle we’re in. After reading it, decide whether subscribing to Red Alert would help you in the fight:

“America has been sliding into the abyss for decades, but now, because a large number of Americans were beginning to wake up, the enemy has been forced into the open. The global cabal has brazenly stolen the presidency and the Senate. They’ve locked down the nation and shut down our economy. And they openly say they’ll remake the Supreme Court, add new Democratic states to the Union, take our firearms, promote godless cultural programs, institute anti-white schemes like reparations, herd us into cities to be easily controlled, crush our sovereignty by tethering us to international communist bodies like the U.N. and treaties like the Paris Climate Accords, crack down as never before on free speech and silence America-firsters, forcibly vaccinate people with a dangerous bio-weapon and arrest anyone who refuses to be a human guinea pig, foist a Chinese-style social credit system upon us, and so much more. They will move toward their goal of world order rapidly now. We must unite against this hostile takeover – this communist coup!”

Zack Strong,

January 26, 2021