Ever since a Russian jet went down over Egypt under suspicious circumstances and Russia, to the surprise of many, “confirmed” that it was “unequivocally a terrorist attack,” I have been convinced that Putin is no outsider to the New World Order. I was close to convinced already as it seemed there were some behind-the-scenes maneuverings surrounding the Syrian crisis, but it did take some convincing since the leaked Victoria Nuland tapes boldly exposed Deep State tactics I would have thought Deep State actors might want to keep hidden. But the nagging fact that Putin had been installed by Yeltsin who had been installed by Bill Clinton kept me skeptical as did other strange facts including Putin giving Edward Snowden cover.
It has been clear to me from the beginning that Edward Snowden was and still is a US government operative whose job as a limited hangout was to get us used to the Total Surveillance State to the point where we wouldn’t make a stink as they codified it–which is exactly what happened with the newspeak-dubbed USA FREEDOM ACT. Why, I wondered, did Putin not expose this? I had figured that he was exploiting the “hangout” part of Snowden’s limited hangout and reserving the revelation of the psy-op for when, if ever, it would fly.
As episode after episode unfolded with Putin and Russia playing right into the official narrative of the West, however, I had to conclude that Putin may be merely playing his part. What part might that be? To put it in Hegelian terms, Putin would be the antithesis to the West’s thesis and the synthesis would be Brzezinski’s promised “convergence of east and west.”
If this is the case, there would be two purposes to Putin’s role-playing….First and foremost, the Russian population is far less trusting of media and government narratives, from what I can gather. If Putin wants to drag them into worldwide conflict, he’d better have a darn good reason. The US population, on the other hand, believes the official narrative of the who, what and why in the Middle East despite the fact that the foreign policy that results spreads terrorism and refugees everywhere. The West can afford to yield the high road in this drama to Putin in order to get their wars.
Second, while listening to an interview with a Montenegrin activist who says the population doesn’t want NATO or Russia yet the government insists they choose one, I realized that, in order to subsume the sovereignty of small nations into regional groupings (a necessary step toward world government), promises of benefits from friendly alliances alone won’t always work–sometimes it’s necessary to have an outside threat. If Russia wants to control Syria and look like the good guy, Syria has to beg for it. What would make them do that? An invasion by the greater of two evils (as they would see it). I’m not saying there aren’t myriad real conflicts in Syria as well as the Middle East generally, but, to use James Corbett’s metaphor, this is a game of three-dimensional chess and to make sense of what’s happening on our board, we must see what’s happening on the board above.
One of the lingering questions I had about why certain moves were being made, however, was the tanking of oil prices, which appeared to be devastating to Russia and a set-up by the West. I don’t accept the premise that supply and demand had anything to do with it: it’s a highly controlled market, the plunge happened too precipitously and most obviously, the price of oil reached lower depths this time than it did during the economic standstill of 2008. An article I read today might provide the answer: Will Russia End Up Controlling 73% of Global Oil Supply?
Apparently, Putin is taking the oil price rout as an opportunity to dominate the world oil market and the oil cartel in the wake of a weakening OPEC. The convergence of east and west requires balance and may be one explanation for why the United States has been deliberately weakened. By the same token, the east must be built up–perhaps this is a step in that process.