Topic: Donetsk, Kharkov, Lugansk - way to Russia. - page 117. (Read 734937 times)

There is no overwhelming support among the Russians of the Bolshevik Revolution. In Juri Lina's book, you will realize why.

The Bolshevik revolution was actually 85% extremist Jewish and the financiers (Jacob Schiff , etc) were Jewish so the Soviet Union, at face value,  was a primarily Jewish enterprise. But we know now, it might have been because these greedy financiers happened to be Jewish & they were only manipulating the innate hatred of their fellow minority Jews so they could be used to terrorize the Russians (just like they are manipulating now the inferiority complex of the Ukrainians to hate the Russians).

More than a 100 million Russians were killed by the Soviets to make the Russians obey. Calculations predict that Russia should have a 300 million population by now if the Soviet Union did not interrupt its normal history.

I quote some parts:

If we can somehow ascribe Max Warburg's financing of Lenin to German "patriotism," it was certainly not "patriotism" which inspired Schiff, Morgan, Rockefeller and Milner to bankroll the Bolsheviks. Both Britain and America were at war with Germany and were allies of Czarist Russia. To free dozens of German divisions to switch from the Eastern front to France and kill hundreds of thousands of American and British was nothing short of treason.

In the Bolshevik Revolution we see many of the same old faces that were responsible for: creating the Federal Reserve System, initiating the graduated income tax, setting up the tax-free foundations and pushing us into WWI. However, if you conclude that this is anything but coincidental, your name will be immediately expunged from the Social Register.

No revolution can be successful without organization and money. "The downtrodden masses" usually provide little of the former and none of the latter. But Insiders at the top can arrange for both.

What did these people possibly have to gain in financing the Russian Revolution? What did they have to gain by keeping it alive and afloat, or, during the 1920's by pouring millions of dollars into what Lenin called his New Economic Program, thus saving the Soviets from collapse?

Why would these "capitalists" do all this? If your goal is global conquest, you have to start somewhere. It may or may not have been coincidental, but Russia was the one major European country without a central bank. In Russia, for the first time, the Communist conspiracy gained a geographical homeland from which to launch assaults against the other nations of the world. The West now had an enemy.

In the Bolshevik Revolution we have some of the world's richest and most powerful men financing a movement which claims its very existence is based on the concept of stripping of their wealth men like the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Schiffs, Warburgs, Morgans, Harrimans, and Milners. But obviously these men have no fear of international Communism. It is only logical to assume that if they financed it and do not fear it, it must be because they control it. Can there be any other explanation that makes sense?

Remember that for over 150 years it has been standard operating procedure of the Rothschilds and their allies to control both sides of every conflict. You must have an "enemy" if you are going to collect from the King. The East-West balance-of-power politics is used as one of the main excuses for the socialization of America. Although it was not their main purpose, by nationalization of Russia the Insiders bought themselves an enormous piece of real estate, complete with mineral rights, for somewhere between $30 and $40 million.

We can only theorize on the manner in which Moscow is controlled from New York, London and Paris. Undoubtedly much of the control is economic, but certainly the international bankers have an enforcer arm within Russia to keep the Soviet leaders in line. The organization may be SMERSH, the international Communist murder organization described in testimony before Congressional Committees and by Ian Fleming in his James Bond books. For although the Bond novels were wildly imaginative, Fleming had been in British Navy intelligence, maintained excellent intelligence contacts around the world and was reputedly a keen student of the international conspiracy.

The Bolshevik Revolution was financed by the Kuhn, LOeb, Co. of New York through Jacob Schiff.

Lenin, Trotsky, etc. are just professional revolutionaries paid by the Anglo-Zionists. It was not a Russian occupation, the Russians were occupied.

You can start your reading with this one.

http://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=NoneDare&C=4#Bolshevik

I'll check out Juris Lina, and am already familiar with the other two.

My points are that however much Russians insist on claiming to be the King of the Victims of Communism

1) the USSR was the result of overwhelming Russian support for the Bolshevik revolution and subsequent obedience thereof
2) Russia has all the hyrdocarbons and sells it to dirt-poor Ukraine

LOL, I don't wanna waste time but I guess I might just do some good & help you rewire your sloppy mental capacity.

Above I highlighted the confirmation you love FOOLING YOURSELF.

Russia, Kazakhstan & Belarus also suffered 50 years Soviet oppression but they grew.

Some references on the cruelty of the Soviets suffered most of all by Russians:

1) Juri Lina- Under  The Sign  of the Scorpion
2) Solzhenitsyn- 200 Years Together
3) all the Antony Sutton books which proved that the Soviet occupation was actually sponsored by the Western financial elite
    a. WEstern Technology & the Soviet Economy
    b. The Best Enemy That Money Can Buy
    c. Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution
4) Gar Allen, None Dare Call It Conspiracy

Soviet Union was a creation of the same financial elite battling Russia now using the stupid UKrainians as traitorous accessory, the Russians were the prime victims then but not anymore, they are resisting

All the evidence are on those books. ALL THE BARBAROUS ACTS ACCUSED OF THE RUSSIANS NOW DURING THE SOVIET OCCUPATION WERE ACTUALLY THE FAULT OF THE SAME WESTERN FINANCIAL ELITE WHICH FINANCED THE BOLSHEVIKS


*THE SOVIET UNION WAS JUST A DRAMA CREATED BY THE ANGLO-ZIONIST

Ukraine is poor because 1) 50 years of USSR oppression and 2) lack of local hydrocarbon resources.

I am on the other side of the world and just want peace between the two sibling societies, both of which I look forward to visiting in happier times.

Ukraine was the second most prosperous part of the USSR when they split but Kazakhstan , despite only a third in population, outgrew UKraine 3x, and Belarus, despite having 1/6 of the population, outgrew Ukraine 2x.

GDP-PPP per capita        GDP-PPP, Total            POPULATION
Russia        $24,298                     3,491,600,000.00        146,149,200
Kazakhstan  $23,038                      395,500,000.00          17,330,000   
Belarus        $17,623
Ukraine        $8,651                         392,500,000.00         42,981,850

Ukraine is poor because of the Ukrainians, it's not the fault of anybody. I hope you have enough intelligence to realize that.

BTW, whenever ClosetForces & Pagan lay eggs in their propaganda here, you appear. It's obvious you are their handler but you are just dumb. You know, better disband your team & defect.

It's more fun with the winners.

 

No tricks here.  Obama sucks, and I'm glad Russia has prospered under Putin because the people there suffered so long under the USSR and Yeltsin.

Is it asking so much for Russians to recognize Ukraine suffered even more, as demonstrated by their low per-capita GDP?

What is the point of Russia bullying its little sister at this point?  Hasn't the Kremlin inflicted enough cruelty on her already?

LOL? Reverse psychology because the Gay Putin propaganda of ClosetForces flopped & boomeranged. He always flops anyway. I know his CIA handlers must be irritated by now but give the poor schmuck some slack. It's your fault, you recruit very sloppily. Just have fun, anyway girls & boys are cheap in Kiev. KIev is the prostitution capital of the world for nothing.

BTW, the defeat in UKraine by the Ukie comedians is NOT due to the sexual orientation of Obama. The most cruel warriors in history are gay like Alexander, etc.

How nice, Russians and Americans can agree on something!   

We are finally realizing what a mistake Obola was (it only took them 6 years).

Too bad they can't all be Ronald Reagan or George Washington.

Putin will get along fine with Rand Paul, but might not like Hillary because she has bigger balls.

Here, let me help with the funs:

Yesterday, the living legend, the singer Iosif Kobzon visited Donetsk People's Republic. He was born in the Donetsk region, so it was coming back to his homeland, despite the impotent prohibition coming from Kiev. Previously Kobzon was barred from entering Latvia and attending the musical festival in Jurmala. All because he said that it self-determination of people of Crimea and Novorossia is their democratic right.
Kobzon has the title of People's Artist of USSR and is an honour citizen of 7 cities in the Donetsk region. During his visit, which many consider heroic (The self-defence forces had to work extra hard to provide him with a safe passage) he brought with him humanitarian aid in the form of insulin to a diabetes medical centre that was started for medication by Kiev and people with diabetes there survived entirely on medication supplied by Russia. And of course he performed for and with people in schools and in the Donetsk Opera house. Today h was scheduled to come to Lugansk.

Why do you care about his sexual orientation so much?

Michelle Obama is the first first lady who looked like a basketball player. NBA at that, mind you.

Amazing, no?


  

You know, I have this sneaking suspicion the Ukraine fiasco came about because of the unrequited love of Obama to Putin. Putin won't give in to Obama's wishes so Obama is using the dumb Ukrainians to harass Putin.

I can't blame him. Michelle Obama has more muscular arms than Putin. She looks like a NBA basketball player


 

That's the former boyfriend of Obama, Reggie Love. Obama doesn't like Ukrainians, he prefers Blacks, they  have bigger dongs

http://hillbuzz.org/is-barack-obama-gay

HMMmm. You sound eager to check it out. Go ahead and recon. All I care about is the fact that Putin

is probably an undercover homodog/queerball, shaved chest and all. I mean that respectfully. Just sayin  

I mean, what THE HELL is HE doin'? FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!!!
HE IS FORCIBLY DRY HUMPING ANOTHER MAN HERE:


and if he's got goggles on, that can only

mean ONE THING: He's getting ready to do the

DREADED "Double Frogman/Cleveland Steamer" combo.

Messy but DEVASTATINGLY effective. Giddyup  

LOL, your obsessions are being exposed.

Why "Dark Forces", it should be "ClosetForces", don't you think so?..

Advice: why cruise in San Francisco when you could do it cheaper in Kiev? If girls could be had for $15, I'm sure boys there will only cost you $1....

Here's something for you KKKremlinite undercover tinkerbells:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bSdM3IGhKY

TOP SECRET
RUSSIANS ARE SUPPLyING WEAPONS TO NOVOROSSIA