Putin Slams Governments For Imperialism, Pedophilia, and “Faith in Satan”




In a rarely seen speech, Putin states that there is a moral crisis occurring in the west and it is one that is purposely created by governments.

In short, the moral foundations of objective right and wrong often linked to Christendom have eroded.

In their place the imperial oligarchs have erected a system that reverses what is good and replaces it with propaganda that leads to cultural decay and erasure of identity, according to Putin.

He suggests that traditional faith in God has been replaced by Satanism. It sounds crazy enough, but then again, there does seem to be at least some degree of affinity for occult religious practices among certain politically connected individuals. Whether it is “Satanism” or something altogether different, is a question we will leave others to decide.

He says parties which “promote the propaganda of pedophilia” have been seriously considered as legitimate due to the excesses of political correctness.

The speech has received renewed interest in light of the current investigation into US politicians involved in sex trafficking and pedophile rings (what many are calling #pedogate).

And Putin is not just talking, he’s taking action too.

Fairly recently he implemented a ban on any US foster parents adopting Russian children.




The ban seems extreme, but one must admit it is true that the foster care industry in the US is rife with trafficking and child prostitution, using “adoption” as a front in many cases.

Putin then adds that while this moral crisis is happening at a national level, there are international attempts to eliminate sovereign nations and replace them with a system of globalized hegemony.

We know that we’re supposed to listen to the corporate media and believe that Putin is inherently diabolical. And like most powerful leaders, Putin has been involved in his share of transgressions.

But on this point, at least, Putin is technically correct. There is indeed an international western power-structure bent on creating global Statehood or a unipolar geopolitical order. Rockefeller’s recent death reminds us that he admitted he was part of this structure.

Perhaps this is why the prospect of national autonomy, whether it be in Africa or Latin America or the Middle East, has always frightened the global transnationalists.

Nations that do not cooperate with the shift into a global hegemonic order are demonized and propped up as bogeymen. A moment’s reflection on history furnishes numerous examples.

A permanent, unelected form of government, or what is known as the deep state, usually creates a pretext for conquering such nations by force, eliminating their chance for self-determination.

Given Putin’s views, it’s perhaps natural to question if Russia has become the latest bogeyman for the deep state and its NATO allies.

As political philosopher Noam Chomsky has pointed out in the past, the deep state has multiple ways of taking down those who defy its quest for a globalized economic order.

It can send CIA operatives into the defiant nation who pose as “journalists” or “musicians.” Those operatives begin spreading propaganda to incite a violent color revolution and install a US-friendly puppet.

As the defiant nation, you have a relatively narrow range of options. If you let the operatives spread the propaganda, you risk being violently overthrown, or becoming a failed state. If you imprison or assassinate the operatives, the deep state will then use its media broadcasting centers in the West to portray you as a blood thirsty dictator who kills journalists and musicians.

Another technique used by the deep state might be to attack its own political institutions and infrastructure and blame it on you. This can be done not only physically but digitally with tools that can leave a “fingerprint” falsely indicating that you were the attacker. It is then claimed that you are threatening democracy and must be eliminated.

In every case, the deep state will use the situation in an attempt to initiate military conflict and dominate the defiant country.

Watch the video and let us know what you think.

Here is a portion of the complete transcript:Another serious challenge to Russia’s identity is linked to events taking place in the world. Here there are both foreign policy and moral aspects. We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilisation. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual. They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan.

The excesses of political correctness have reached the point where people are seriously talking about registering political parties whose aim is to promote paedophilia. People in many European countries are embarrassed or afraid to talk about their religious affiliations. Holidays are abolished or even called something different; their essence is hidden away, as is their moral foundation. And people are aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism, resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis.

What else but the loss of the ability to self-reproduce could act as the greatest testimony of the moral crisis facing a human society? Today almost all developed nations are no longer able to reproduce themselves, even with the help of migration. Without the values embedded in Christianity and other world religions, without the standards of morality that have taken shape over millennia, people will inevitably lose their human dignity. We consider it natural and right to defend these values . One must respect every minority’s right to be different, but the rights of the majority must not be put into question.

At the same time we see attempts to somehow revive a standardised model of a unipolar world and to blur the institutions of international law and national sovereignty. Such a unipolar, standardised world does not require sovereign states; it requires vassals. In a historical sense this amounts to a rejection of one’s own identity, of the God-given diversity of the world.

Russia agrees with those who believe that key decisions should be worked out on a collective basis, rather than at the discretion of and in the interests of certain countries or groups of countries. Russia believes that international law, not the right of the strong, must apply. And we believe that every country, every nation is not exceptional, but unique, original and benefits from equal rights, including the right to independently choose their own development path.

This is our conceptual outlook, and it follows from our own historical destiny and Russia’s role in global politics. Our present position has deep historical roots. Russia itself has evolved on the basis of diversity, harmony and balance, and brings such a balance to the international stage.

I want to remind you that the Congress of Vienna of 1815 and the agreements made at Yalta in 1945, taken with Russia’s very active participation, secured a lasting peace. Russia’s strength, the strength of a winning nation at those critical junctures, manifested itself as generosity and justice. And let us remember [the Treaty of] Versailles, concluded without Russia’s participation. Many experts, and I absolutely agree with them, believe that Versailles laid the foundation for the Second World War because the Treaty of Versailles was unfair to the German people: it imposed restrictions with which they could not cope, and the course of the next century became clear.

There is one more fundamental aspect to which I want to draw your attention. In Europe and some other countries so-called multiculturalism is in many respects a transplanted, artificial model that is now being questioned, for understandable reasons. This is because it is based on paying for the colonial past. It is no accident that today European politicians and public figures are increasingly talking about the failures of multiculturalism, and that they are not able to integrate foreign languages or foreign cultural elements into their societies.

Over the past centuries in Russia, which some have tried to label as the “prison of nations”, not even the smallest ethnic group has disappeared. And they have retained not only their internal autonomy and cultural identity, but also their historical space. You know, I was interested to learn (I did not even know this) that in Soviet times [authorities] paid such careful attention to this that virtually every small ethnic group had its own print publication, support for its language, and for its national literature. We should bring back and take on board much of what has been done in this respect.

Along with this the different cultures in Russia have the unique experience of mutual influence, mutual enrichment and mutual respect. This multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity lives in our historical consciousness, in our spirit and in our historical makeup. Our state was built in the course of a millennium on this organic model.

Russia ­ as philosopher Konstantin Leontyev vividly put it ­ has always evolved in “blossoming complexity” as a state-civilisation, reinforced by the Russian people, Russian language, Russian culture, Russian Orthodox Church and the country’s other traditional religions. It is precisely the state-civilisation model that has shaped our state polity. It has always sought to flexibly accommodate the ethnic and religious specificity of particular territories, ensuring diversity in unity.

Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions are an integral part of Russia’s identity, its historical heritage and the present-day lives of its citizens. The main task of the state, as enshrined in the Constitution, is to ensure equal rights for members of traditional religions and atheists, and the right to freedom of conscience for all citizens.

 

via:

livingresistance.com



From Around the Web