How Many Putin(s)?

Not knowing who-is-who in the Russian government, only recently I learned of Nicolai Patrushev. He is reputed as “one of Putin’s closest and most trusted advisers,” who “has been the nerve center of most of Putin’s special operations,” and “was one of 24 Russians close to Putin subjected to sanctions by the United States.”

But all the world well knows of Russia’s support and heavy sacrifice made to defend Syria from the ISIS-Saudi-Israeli concocted Caliphate-Jihadi operation. A venture – the Caliphate – reminding of 9/11 in scope and objectives, but conducted on a different soil, with different victims and different patsies.

And all the world knows well that Israel continues to bomb and kill in Syria, without apparent fear of retaliation, the very country for whose defense many Russian soldiers gave their life.

Therefore, I could hardly believe the image of Patrushev in Israel, joining hands, in a masonic-looking triple-clutch, with the diabolical Bolton and with the devil himself in the middle.

I thought it was a false creation, proceeding from a heat-oppressed brain (1) – yet an image that should terrify Syrians, Palestinians, Arabs, Iranians and all ethnic Europeans concerned with the survival of Western, Christian-based Civilization.

The Saker and other knowledgeable sources have documented that Israel’s expectation of concessions by Russia were fruitless. And it could well be that Putin’s political vigor is balanced by consummate prudence and careful weighing of consequences.

Still, seeing a high-ranking Russian official shaking the devils’ hands, polluted with the blood of thousands of Palestinians and millions of Arabs, is and should be a depressing sight.

For, irrespective of how many layers of diplomacy, or dissimulation, disguise reality behind appearances, a picture is still worth a thousand words. And though the practice among politicians may be universal, the act of dissimulation is still a breach of faith.

Recently demonstrating the idea was an angry Trump, charging with the grace of an albino hippopotamus against the British ambassador, guilty of giving his British masters his candid Trump’s evaluation.

On the other hand, the almost-unanimous British Government’s defense of the ambassador tells more about the tone of current British politics, (and by inference about the tone of the nation), than a ponderous treatise on international relations.

For, in the end, the invisible hand of Fate turned the British Ambassador into an unwilling buffoon. And yet, in the current climate of Western politics, buffoons are a godsend. For they don’t understand what they are doing, believe everything which is in the domain of personal interest, know how to lie because their whole life is a dissimulation, and create enough confusion to disorient people and prevent the birth of a coordinated and effective alternative to the thought-unique. Where ‘thought-unique’ concisely describes a long-term plan to eliminate independent thought by inventing fake oppositions, fake contradistinctions and fake news. Plus, of course, enacting censorship and criminalizing speech.

In fact, when it appears inevitable that the plan or part of it may be uncovered, the buffoon even becomes necessary. For his meandering creates confusion and makes it difficult to understand what is going on, though he dutifully follows the recipe his masters imposed on him, and that he takes on faith.

An emblematic example of programmed confusion are the American presidential elections, which offer the voters a choice between two elephants. One of them is actually an ass, but that is irrelevant poetic license, inserted into a rigidly enforced ceremonial and substance-less selection. With scores of buffoons upon the stage, uttering words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. (2)

And where voters are persuaded not by the golden spell of eloquence, but by the candidate’s dubious quality of simply existing – a being declared electoral and electable by shadowy characters, the product of palpably dirty money and impalpable dirty tricks. For what money is not dirty that was paid – as in the last presidential elections – to endorse the rape of Syria’s Golan Heights and to anoint the theft of Jerusalem, for the benefit of we know who?

But I digress.

Intrigued by Patrushev’s appearance in friendly assembly with two wretched individuals who embody the core of evil, I wondered if there is more behind the image. To this end, I located a document suggesting evidence, not apparent, based on what we know, but puzzling, based on what we saw. And possibly suggesting that, besides Patrushev, there may be more than one Putin involved.

All of the above and below assumes that what we see is what IS, rather than a shadow’s shadow (3), while reality remains hidden behind the tinted glasses of semblance. Obvious caveat, but it makes me feel better to say it.

Anyway, I located a thesis prepared at the University of Pennsylvania, and titled “Putin’s Chosen People: Theories of Russian Jewish Policy, 2000-2017.”

The university authorities have declared it an ‘honor’ thesis. Which, as I have learned, is defined as a “a comprehensive 6-credit research effort of original scholarship. … It offers students an opportunity to work closely with faculty members on advanced research topics or creative endeavors.

I have no doubt that, when a laureate, this student will find a lucrative position in academia or in government, riding the tide of pomp that beats upon the high shores of the world (4).

We learn from the thesis’ abstract that “Despite support from and for right-wing elements and a deep-seeded national history of anti-Semitism, the policies of the Russian government under Vladimir Putin have been markedly devoid of anti-Semitism.” And though “foreign policy concerns fail to explain these policies adequately,… the personalized influence of the president on Jewish policy suggests a personalized, hyper-centralized regime generally.”

Expectations were for Putin to be anti-Semitic. For “… The major regimes that preceded it, the Soviet Union and the Romanov dynasty, were officially anti-Semitic and actively persecuted Jews inside their territory, often singling them out above other minorities for special mistreatment.

The Russian population is also widely considered anti-Semitic, thanks in part to the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and libels sometimes peddled by the Russian Orthodox Church… In reality… the unofficial anti-Semitism of some of its officials appears to be limited, and strictly personal, as opposed to part of government policy.

He states that “it would not be surprising or unusual if Putin supported anti-Semitic ideas...because his pre-Soviet predecessors, the Romanoff tsars, embraced stridently anti-Semitic policies, including the Pale of Settlement, state sanctioned or state enabled pogroms, and exclusion of Jews from many kinds of business and government.”

As an aside, readers may be aware that most recently Israel asked 300 million $ from the Polish government, in compensation for the anti-Jewish rebellion and mini-war that occurred in Poland, in 1946, well one year after the collapse of Nazism. A circumstance that should prompt some meditation on the enforced narrative about the whole business.

“…. even if the Russian revolution could only temporarily suppress the expression of anti-Semitism. … the behavior hostile towards Jews… was replaced by Marxist attitudes opposed to religion. Many secular Jews had great prominence in Lenin’s party, including Lev Kamenev, Grigori Zinoviev and Leon Trotsky.”

In fact… “Stalin promulgated much harsher policies toward other ethnic and religious minorities than towards the Jews. And… despite the creation of a Jewish autonomous Oblast on the Mongolian border, Jews were never forcibly deported there.”

“By the middle of Stalin’s reign, however, official anti-Semitism began to creep back into the Soviet government. The open propaganda against Jews jarred with Lenin’s heritage and internationalism. For this reason the Soviet authorities replaced the term Jews with Zionists. Since Zionism was a legitimate enemy of socialism, it became possible to carry out an anti-Semitic campaign under the guise of the fight against it. The hatred of Jews was so high that the Soviet propaganda tended to describe Zionism as a greater evil than the United States, suggesting that American imperialism was merely a tool used by the Jews to conquer the world.

The last days of the Stalin era also saw the Doctors Plot…. The plot was symptomatic of Stalin’s fears that Jews where a potential fifth column within the Soviet Union, a variation of the ancient “dual loyalty” libel used against Jews as far back as the Roman Empire.

“Libel ?” – we may ask. Here is a verbatim transcription of a very recent statement by the current Leader of the American Congress at an AIPAC meeting,

“Schumer comes from the Hebrew word “schowmer”, which means guardian, watchman. My ancestors were guardian of the ghetto-ward of “Jordcoast” in Galicia, and when they came to Ellis Island, they said their name in Yiddish, “Schoimer” and it got written down as “Schumer”

To you I say this. That name was given to me for a reason. For as long as I live, for as long as I have the privilege of serving in the senate from New York , I will unflinchingly, unstintingly, and with all of my strength be “shoumer Israel, a guardian of Israel. Ladies and Gentlemen, I am your “throwel kai (yiddish)” in Israel and America. The Jewish nation lives, now and forever.”

Skipping the rest of our scholar’s rendition of Russian history we find next,

Putin’s relations towards both individual Jews and the Jewish people in Russia have been remarkably warm. Individuals of Jewish background have been among Putin’s closest advisers and allies during his years in power, including Roman Abramovich (chairman of the Federation of the Jewish communities of Russia and one of the most visible oligarchs.) ... In fact, state anti-Semitism (as opposed to popular anti-Semitism) has almost completely disappeared from the Russian political scene. Jews or so-called half-Jews hold a large number of high positions in the state apparatus, including the government and leading state corporations.”

In contrast with the Soviet Union, “… The Russian government under Putin has maintained remarkably close and cooperative relations with Israel…. Putin has done more than any other Russian leader to improve economic and strategic ties with Israel…. The policies and the true intentions of the Putin regime and their close cooperation with Israel suggest a sincere respect and affinity that, while not unlimited, would be scandalous for any previous Russian ruler. In short, for centuries of Russian history, through different political regimes and social conditions, the standing decision has been that the Jews are to blame for Russia’s problems, and this presumption has resulted in countless incidents of discrimination, victimization and violence. Putin’s cooperation with Israel suggests that (that) decision has been nullified.

This is reflected in his domestic affairs as well.

*… He promised to donate one month’s salary for the construction of a Jewish Museum of tolerance.
*… He meets regularly with representatives from Russian Jewish communities and various Western Jewish organizations.
*… He met with a representative of the European Jewish Congress, attended many Jewish religious celebrations and regularly sends congratulations to the Russian Jews in connection with their holidays.

It appears that Putin’s friendliness towards Jews is either being encouraged among government officials or is voluntarily imitated by them, suggesting a more permanent and official status of pro-Semitic attitudes within the government.

Putin has praised the role of Jews in Russia’s history and contemporary life…. It is no longer uncommon to see a mayor or governor visit a synagogue or congratulate the (Jewish) community on a holiday. … Already Yeltsin… involved many Jews in his government and administration.

Referring to Lev Gumilev, a Soviet ethnologist and historian who – according to our scholar – had an effect on Putin’s not-negative evaluation of the Soviet Union… “There is no evidence that Putin subscribes to his (Gumilev’s) classification of Jews as a parasitic people.”

In attempting an explanation for the change in the Russian political wind, the scholar quotes Yevgenia Markovna Albats. She is a Russian investigative journalist, political scientist, writer and radio host. Who, as of 2011, works as a chief editor of The New Times magazine and is quoted as saying,

“Russia pretty much lost its relationship with Arab countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union. At the same time Israel came on the map, actually because there is a huge Russian-speaking population in Israel, partially because there are a lot of Jews – powerful Jews – in Russia who have some aspirations for Israel, partially because Israel is a developed nation. It is a great startup nation and it was pragmatically better for Russia to do business with Israel relevant to its ends. So definitely it was connected to its foreign-policy.” 

The scholar then refers to what he defines as the ‘Biographical Hypothesis.’ “Putin’s remarkable pro-Semitic policies may be inspired by his own biography, which includes benevolent intervention by many Jews. One example is the Jewish family that shared Putin’s communal apartment in St. Petersburg… An early religious experience of Putin’s may also have impressed on him that the Jews are not a threat to orthodoxy or Russian culture as he may perceive other religions to be…. Another figure who appears to have had a great impact on Putin’s life was his first judo coach. He talked about his Jewish wrestling coach Anatolii Rakhlin as a person who “probably played the crucial role in my life.” 

Putin’s early study of German was encouraged and mentored by Mrs. Yuditskaya Berliner. Berliner is Jewish, and now lives in Tel Aviv in an apartment Putin bought for her as a demonstration of his appreciation for her teaching many years before. Putin bought the apartment for her while on a state visit in 2005 although it was not disclosed for some years.

Many of those (Jews) personally close and important to Putin are rewarded with expensive gifts, sometimes including multibillion dollar businesses, as in the case of Arkady and Boris Rotenberg, who jointly control the SGM group and have over 1 billion in assets each, thanks to the friendship with Putin, stemming from their shared dojo in St. Petersburg. The Rotenbergs are also of Jewish ancestry.

The most convincing existing evidence suggests that the Jewish policies of Putin’s government are primarily motivated by his personal attitudes towards Jews, based on biography which includes similar notably influential and positive Jewish friends, mentors, and role models.”

In conclusion, as just about all scholars conclude in these cases, “… no single hypothesis presented completely explains the Putin regime’s (friendly) Jewish policies… and further research is imperative.”

Nor, I may add, any of the above hypotheses can explain Putin’s chief-advisor’s conspicuous hand-shake with the dreadful agents of Zion, a gesture of equally dreadful symbolism. For Patrushev is not Putin. It is possible or likely that, in Patrushev’s mind, the necessity or convenience of diplomacy overbalanced the inconvenience of appearing ostentatiously friendly with two criminals – or recognized as criminals by millions. It would be interesting to know how readers would hypothetically handle a similar situation.

In any event, whether anyone can explain Putin’s friendly Jewish policies is uncertain. But we still should be fairly safe in assuming that, unlike Trump’s daughter, Putin’s conversion to Judaism is not imminent.As for the diligent scholar who wrote the thesis, he just confirmed that cultivated leisure is the aim of man.

More worrying, however, are the curious, and frankly sinister noises coming from the world of official and traditional religion. And I am not referring to the fundamentalists, also called dispensationalists, or neo conservatives or, more diabolically, neocons. I am referring to Catholicism and to a creeping ideology, inside the Vatican, which has some perplexing association or similarities with fundamentalism.

Before any of my twenty-five readers says, “impossible!” I must summarize the key notions of fundamentalism and how they connect to the Catholic developments I referred to.

The millions who listen in enchantment to the words of sundry Southern fundamentalist preachers are but cannon fodder in the holocaust of brains. For the absolute madness of fundamentalism cannot be explained without considering the times of its birth and the fertile ground of that era, so suitable for sowing the seeds of lunacy.

As readers well know, the Protestant Reformation spawned the birth and growth of an almost innumerable number of sects and ‘churches’, each interpreting the Scriptures differently, and each claiming to have the correct interpretation.

The period 1820-1850, in America, was as ripe for a ‘church-bubble’ as the late 1990s were ripe for the ‘dot-com-bubble.’ One of the most notable, or rather notorious products of that period was the Mormon Church, founded by a shyster-in-chief called Joseph Smith.

His biographies differ only on details. One I read years ago said that on a hill, somewhere in New York State, an angel gave him two silver plates containing the ‘true’ history of Christianity. Smith was directed to establish a religion inspired by the saintly principles of the early Christian church. Hence his followers were ‘saints of a later day’ or “Latter Day Saints.” Much of Smith’s religion drew from the Old Testament, including polygamy. Unfortunately the silver plates were never found, because during a particularly violent thunderstorm a lightning melted and vaporized them.

As Joseph Smith’s flock grew in members, they were repeatedly expelled from various places where they established their residence. Eventually they arrived at Carthage, Illinois. Rumors have it that Smith proved a bit too friendly with some wives of the yet-unconverted locals. Their enraged husbands and an anti-polygamy mob broke into the jail where Smith had been confined and killed him. Once more the flock left and eventually found a place without locals in Utah.

The same ‘church-bubble’ produced another notable character, namely the founder of the Fundamentalist Church. He was the Anglo-Irish John Darby, born in 1800, initially a member of the Church of the Plymouth Brethren, then founder of the Church of the Exclusive Brethren and later of Fundamentalism, Dispensationalism, Futurism, the Rupture-Theology, the Pre-Tribulation Theory and more. All his theories and theologies equate to senseless speaking or speaking such as sense cannot untie (5). They are as sibylline as they are absurd and, in the end, actually amusing, were they not taken seriously by so many.

The core of the ‘Exclusive Brethren’ theology is based on a serious application of an unserious paradox. Which goes as follows: The Apostles were twelve – these pears are twelve – therefore the Apostles were pears.

John Darby’s theology closely parallels the queer and paradoxical principle of deduction. “The Apostles were Jews – Christ was a Jew – therefore Jews are Christians.” The incredulous reader may easily verify the vibrant presence of a very active Fundamentalist/Dispensationalist sub-group called ‘Jews-for-Jesus’.

This is amusing music to the ears of authentic Jews, who are laughing their heads off, and even more musical to the ears of rabid Zionists, who never could have expected such immense help from men who, in their Talmud, are described as donkeys, and from women who, in their same sacred text, are described as prostitutes.

Darby’s ‘church’ may have met the end of all flesh, were it not for a follower called Cyrus Scofield, born in 1843 and who was, at first, an ‘alien soldier’ in the Confederate Army. After leaving the Army he moved to St. Louis Missouri, where he married into a wealthy French family and later had some scrapes with the law because of fraud. He then divorced his wife and moved to Texas, where he remarried and founded a branch of the ‘dispensationalist’ Church, according to which ‘Jews are Christians’.

In Texas he began to comment, or rather, annotate the Bible. There are actually not that many comments, but the most critical for all that happened afterwards, refers to Genesis 12:3 (the words in italics are Scofield’s comments).

‘I will bless them that bless thee.’ In fulfillment closely related to the next clause, ‘And curse him that curseth thee.’ Wonderfully fulfilled in the history of the dispersion. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew—well with those who have protected him. The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.”

Again, Scofield’s annotated Bible would probably have been forgotten, but the wheels of fortune caused Scofield to meet with money, in the shape of Wall Street Zionist lawyer Samuel Untermeyer. According to Zionism, the Supreme Realtor in the Sky had assigned to the Chosen People the real estate where their ancestors lived 2000 years before.

Impressed by Scofield’s annotations, Untermeyer introduced him to his wealthy and influential Zionist circle in New York. He then sent him on a lavish tour of Europe and was instrumental in prompting the prestigious Oxford University Press to publish Scofield’s annotated Bible. The rest you know.

Now to the new Vatican ‘fundamentalism.’ In June 2019 the magazine “Civiltà Cattolica”, the New York Times of the Vatican, published an article titled, “Jews and Judaism in Catholic Teaching. A Revolution in Interpretation” – written by the Jesuit Correspondent in Israel Fr. David Neuhaus.

The writer says that the changes incorporated into the Encyclical “Nostra Aetate” (Our New Age) on the relationship between Christianity and Judaism is “one of the great Revolutions of the XX century.” Through the centuries often Christians were taught to connect Jews and Judaism with sin, rebellion, obscurity and evil through a wrong interpretation of biblical texts.”

It was the work of French Jewish historian Marx Jules Isaac…(a member of the Jewish-Masonic Association called Bnai Brit), who documented the teaching of contempt (for Jews) by Christians. Thanks to him the teaching of contempt has been transformed into the teaching of respect.”

No problem so far, but for the ‘teaching of contempt’, for it’s actually the other way around. Readers should familiarize themselves to how the goym are described in the Talmud and in Maimonides’ supplementary text. It’s not even contempt for the Christians, it’s sheer and profound hatred.

But for Fr. Neuhaus it is the ‘Patristic’ (read Catholic) tradition that, erroneously, paints negatively the Judaic incredulity (of Christ). Until “the glorious modernist Revolution of Vatican II (Council), following on the steps of the Bolshevik Revolution, has changed course and has remodeled the contempt connected with the Deicide and with the (Jewish) incredulity in the divinity of Christ…”

The revised prayer “Pro Judaeis” (for the Jews) not only has erased the idea of lack-of-faith by the Jews, but actually says, “Let us pray for the Jews. May the Lord our God, who chose them first among all men to receive his word, help them to always progress in the love of his name and in fidelity to his covenant. […]. Lord grant that the firstborn people of your covenant may come to the fullness of redemption. By Christ Our Lord.” In short, there is a new theology and liturgy that takes the place of the old.

Fr. Neuhaus then refers to a speech by Pope John Paul II in Mainz, where he said that “The old alliance (between Christian and Jews) has never been revoked.”

And a prayer attributed to Pope John XXIII, and quoted by Fr. Neuhaus says, “We are aware today that over many centuries our eyes were so blind that we were no longer able to see the beauty of your chosen people, nor to recognize in your Face (Christ’s) the traits of our privileged brethren. We understand that Cain’s sign is written on our forehead. [!]. Forgive us for the curse we unfairly attributed to their names as Jews. Forgive us for having a second time crucified you in them in their flesh, because we did not know what we were doing.”

In other words, it is the Christians who are blind, because they did not see the beauty of Judaism. Christianity marked itself with the sign of Cain who killed his brother Abel. That is, the deicide people are the Christians, who have crucified Christ a second time, when they taught that Talmudic Judaism is disapproved by God.

I leave it to the reader to decide how closely these tenets approach those held by the plump, prospering and prosperous preachers of Fundamentalism.

Nevertheless, the Zionist movement (in America and elsewhere) is at the forefront of the promotion of open borders (except for Israel), of miscegenation (except for Jews) and of the vilification of Ethnic Europeans as evil (as hinted in the article of Father Neuhaus).

In fact, Yale University, in 1918, started a course titled “The Problem With Whiteness,” and the Zionist Harvard Professor Ignatiev – though denying as false his purported statement that the “white race must die”, – nevertheless admits that his journal “Race Traitor” intends to “keep bashing the dead white males (along with live ones and white women), until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed.”

To conclude, perhaps before the extinction of ethnic Western Europeans, (as per the hope of Ignatiev and the plan of Coudenhove-Kalergy,) Putin will allow to some survivors an Oblast near Mongolia, as his ancestors allowed the Jews, but that the Jews refused. Where the remaining Europeans may establish a new kingdom, a church of refuge, a republic of souls. And where – far beyond the region of sordid utility and sheltered from hatred – beauty, devotion, honor, enthusiasm, the extraordinary, and even the infinite will have a place of worship and an abiding city.


** (1) (2) Macbeth
** (3) Hamlet
** (4) Henry V
** (5) Cymbeline

This entry was posted in Amusing Shakespeare, Angry retorts, Best Shakespeare Quotes, Elegant Shakespearean Quotes, Philosophical, Psychological & Historical Considerations. Bookmark the permalink.