Category Archives: USA

From Recent Correspondence (June 2015)

Q: From the Church point of view, what do you find newsworthy this month?

A: What a difficult question! There has been so much and the month has not ended yet. There has been the declaration by the Pope of Rome that he may consider returning in repentance to the Church Easter (true, his declaration was very vague and there are other, less repentant interpretations), his meeting with President Putin (despite violent US opposition) and the Pope’s approval of the Russian struggle against the anti-Christian European elite. There has also been the tragic EU-manipulated Synod of the Church of Serbia. And then there has been the inevitable closure of the St Sergius Institute in Paris at long last – over 30 years in the making – after its Archbishop asked it to return to Orthodoxy and it refused.

Politically, there has been the G7 meeting in Hitler’s villa outside Munich and the realization that the G7 is now a rather irrelevant US-led Western ghetto, a little huddle with their backs to the wall, unable ever to pay off their own debts, all the more irrelevant since India has now signed a free trade agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union. Then there is the Greek debt crisis (Greece’s debt is only about half of US debt per capita) and the possibility that Greece will at last free itself from EU slavery, after so naively and foolishly joining it thirty years ago. Perhaps economic pain is what Greece needs to lead its people to repentance, just as atheist oppression led Russians to repentance.

However, although it is a very minor event internationally, I would like to mention the transfer of the dismissed Metropolitan Jonah of the group known as ‘The Orthodox Church in America’ (OCA) to the Church Outside Russia (ROCOR). Even ten years ago, let alone thirty years ago, such a move would have been unthinkable, even impossible. The only similar event was in 1976 when Metr Antony (Bloom) requested a transfer to ROCOR. (Ironically, that was at the same time as Metr Antony (Bloom) had himself so wrongly refused to receive the then Fr Kallistos (Ware) into the Russian Church from Constantinople.) Metr Antony’s request was quite rightly refused by Metr Philaret for very good canonical reasons. However, in this very different case Metropolitan Jonah has been accepted by the ROCOR Synod in his retired status.

Q: Could this be the beginning of a movement towards ROCOR?

A: Not necessarily, I think it is a personal choice, but it is still symptomatic of a movement of repentance. The OCA is canonically adrift. Where is it going? What is its identity? What is its future? It is a fragment of the Russian Church adrift for the understandable historical reasons of former Uniatism and for political reasons. It used to be a hotbed of modernism. But today if you look at the most solid parts of the OCA, in Alaska, in Canada and in Pennsylvania around St Tikhon’s, it is clear that it is part of the Russian Church, but, for historical reasons, it is not yet part of the canonical and universally recognized Church Outside Russia. And yet that is clearly what the majority of the OCA is, part of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia. I think this event marks the beginning of healing for the OCA.

Q: Surely part of the original problem was ROCOR itself?

A: There was once a problem with politically-minded, nationalistic individuals in ROCOR, but that is in the past. We have moved on and that generation has left or else died out. Today we are in a completely different situation. Indeed, the last two Metropolitans of ROCOR have been Non-Russian, one a Carpatho-Russian Slovak, the present one a Canadian of Ukrainian origin. This means an opening to the whole multinational Russian Orthodox world outside the Russian Lands. ROCOR is moving towards our ultimate aim, to our universal mission, to prepare the path, as St John the Baptist of old.

Q: You ask questions about the identity and future of the OCA, but surely the same questions can be asked of ROCOR?

A: I disagree with you. Our identity is clear, it is in our name. We are that part of the Russian Orthodox Church that is Outside Russia, that is, outside the Russian Lands. On the one hand we have to be absolutely faithful to the Russian Orthodox Church and its Tradition, on the other hand, we have to express ourselves in the language of the country where we live and through the culture of that country, as seen through Russian Orthodox eyes. That is our missionary witness. And that is our future.

Q: Is that not what the OCA has done?

A: The best of it yes, but sadly some in it have lost, or never even had, the Tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church. For example, only a quarter of the OCA parishes keep the Church calendar, others in it have misunderstood and imagined that just because they live in another country and culture, they can therefore compromise our Faith. Instead of looking at the world through Russian Orthodox eyes, they tend to see Russian Orthodoxy through the eyes of the world. That is very clearly the path of apostasy.

Q: You mention the Synod of the Serbian Church. What is the problem?

A: The problem is the new persecution of the Serbian Church. It is worse than the Communist persecution. The episcopate of the Serbian Church is being herded like a flock of intimidated sheep into a corner, threatened by the EU wolf, behind which stand the USA and the new threat of NATO bombing, uranium-tipped shells and even nuclear war. And do not judge, until you have faced persecution yourself.

Q: Why do Serbs not stand up to defend their Church?

A: Because there are too many ‘Serbian Orthodox’, but not enough Orthodox Serbs.

Q: What do you mean by that?

A: I mean that any country only has value inasmuch as it is Orthodox or has values which are accepting of Orthodoxy. As Dostoyevsky said: ‘A Russian without Orthodoxy is rubbish’. That is the same for every country in the world. When I read of drunken British yobs on a stag night in Prague, do I think that they are English? Of course not. Sadly, the same disease is affecting every country in the world. It is the disease of apostasy. And nominal Orthodoxy is not enough to resist that disease.

Q: What has happened to the St Sergius Institute in Paris?

A: It has closed. A lot of money has disappeared. Archbishop Job is trying to restore Orthodoxy there after thirty years of weak bishops who allowed anarchy by promoting the anarchists. It may never re-open. It is another nail in the coffin of the Paris Exarchate.

Q: What is the situation in the Ukraine?

A: The civil war goes on as the puppet junta in Kiev kills the Ukrainian people. The US State Department is now bribing the Patriarchate of Constantinople to involve itself in schismatic groups in the Ukraine, thus compromising next year’s potential Council. But we have hope that by next year the war will all be over and the Ukraine will be free again. Sadly, however, I do not see any sign of repentance on the part of the US and the EU which, as one British politician rightly said, has blood on its hands in the Ukraine.

Q: And in Syria?

A: There too the war goes on, financed by fanatics in Western-backed Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who have created millions of refugees. In Libya Western intervention has also once more proved to be catastrophic and now 65% of Libyans want to flee, looking back on the Khadafi period almost as paradise, rather as many in impoverished and colonized Eastern Europe now regret the Soviet bloc with all its obvious faults. Today, for instance, a decent salary in Romania is 150 euros – per month – if you can get a job at all. This is all the fruit of Western meddling, divide and rule by reducing to poverty. The result of such meddling is mass migration and the break-up of families. The West has caused this. Rule Number One is that you do not destroy something until you have something better to replace it with. But that is exactly what the West did to the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, as also in Syria, Iraq, Libya etc.

Q: As regards Syria, surely it is the Muslims who are themselves to blame? They are killing each other?

A: When children argue and those children follow a religion which, like Judaism, has no concept of forgiveness, of turning the other cheek, you do not give them expensive arms to kill each other with. But that is precisely what Saudi Arabia and Qatar (and Israel), backed by the USA, have done, whether in Syria, the Lebanon or elsewhere. Remember that Al-Qaeda and Islamic State are CIA inventions to defeat the Soviet Union and divide the Muslim world. The whole Muslim problem began when Britain and then the USA backed Israel as a Western bridgehead in the Arab world. When Western nations turn into terrorist states (that is how Western nations are perceived in the Muslim world) and invade Afghanistan and Iraq, do not be surprised when Muslims turn to terrorism. The radicalization of Muslims was caused by Western governments. Appalling Western terrorism breeds appalling Islamic terrorism.

Q: When did the West set out on this path of apostasy? To what extent was race a factor?

A: I think that there are many misconceptions as regards race and the Western Schism. For example the Neo-Platonist Philip Sherrard presented the Schism as a kind of philosophical dispute between ‘East and West’, between ‘Greek and Latin’ between Plato and Aristotle. True, there was the problem of the Franks, but not for inherent racial reasons, as some modern and rather embittered modern Greek philosophers would have it, but simply because of the mentality which the Franks happened to be the first to adopt. And any race can adopt an anti-Church mentality, as the 20th century showed us. Such racial simplifications completely overlook the multinational nature of the Church. The Church includes Latins like St Hilary of Poitiers and St Ambrose of Milan, Syrians like St Ephraim and St Isaac of Nineveh, Egyptians like St Antony the Great, Georgians like St Nino, not to mention Slavs and so many other nationalities, including Orthodox ‘Franks’ from the period before Charlemagne and from today.

Another point is that although, quite rightly, historians look back to Charlemagne as the real initiator of all the problems, with his massacre of the Saxons and corruption of the Creed, his ramshackle so-called empire was very short-lived. There was a revival of Orthodoxy in the West after him, for example under the Empress Theophano at the end of the tenth century. There was no Schism until the eleventh century and that lasted 100 years; in other words the Schism was not a single event, but a process.

We can do no better than quote the Catholic religious historian, Christopher Dawson: ‘It was not until the eleventh century that the religious bond which united East and West was finally destroyed and Western Christendom emerges as an independent unity, separated alike in culture and religion from the rest of the old Roman world’ (The Making of Europe, P. 47). He relates this to the tenth century and whether ‘feudal barbarism was to capture and absorb the peace-society of the Church or whether the latter could succeed in imposing its ideals and its higher culture on the feudal nobility’ (P. 271). ‘It was not until the eleventh century that the military society (of the barbaric world of northern paganism) was incorporated into the spiritual polity of Western Christendom’ (Pp. 287-288).

In other words the tragedy of the West was that it left the Church and adopted instead the aggressiveness of ‘feudal barbarism’. This, allied with technology, is what lies behind the West’s aggressive imperialism of the second millennium, from 1066 and a couple of decades before that, onwards, and also of the opening years of this already deeply tragic third millennium. We can see this quite clearly in today’s regular gun massacres in the USA. What a culture! Aggression and violence and a society of obesity and mental illness….And you call this civilization?

Q: There is much criticism in the West of President Putin. They have demonized him, making him into a hate-figure. What is the truth?

A: The CIA-fed propaganda is quite shameless, not to say primitive. Of course President Putin, like contemporary Russia, has many faults, but unlike the West, they are both going in the right direction. That is what is important. The name Putin comes from the word ‘put’ which means ‘the path’, ‘the way’. And that is exactly the spiritual meaning of his name, for he is only an instrument. He is not the destination, just part of the way to where we want to go.

Q: What is that destination?

A: Today the atheist West is preaching spiritual death throughout the world. Russia’s spiritual meaning is to preach spiritual life. This is the universal meaning of the coming resurrection of St Seraphim of Sarov for which we must prepare. The West has chosen vulgarity over nobility. We shall not follow. Sadly, we must recognize that when Antichrist comes, he will speak English. It is for us to show him that not all English people will listen to him, that there is a faithful remnant, as in every country throughout the world, that we can speak of nobility, not of vulgarity. It is becoming rapidly apparent, even to those who before resisted – such is repentance – that Orthodox need a Protector, a Guardian, a restored Emperor. A repentant Greece today looks to Russia, a Russia that has thrown off the curse of atheism and apostasy. Many others do the same. We shall not surrender! Christ is victorious!

Christ is Risen!

From Recent Correspondence (March-April 2015)

On the Destiny of the Church Outside Russia

Q: What was the Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) supposed to do in the eighty-five years between its formation in the early 1920s and the reconciliation with the Church inside Russia in 2007?

A: Our first calling was to obey the Gospel by beginning the preaching of Orthodoxy worldwide before the end (Matt 24, 14), which we were providentially enabled to start by virtue of being scattered throughout the world. In other words, it was our calling to bring the serious (and not superficial hobbyists) into the Church, to contact all those who realize that the Church is higher than the spiritual impurity of any national establishment and local culture.

Our preaching was called to be the preaching of Orthodoxy without either of the compromises caused by spiritual impurity, that is, to be real Orthodox Christians free of both provincial and inward-looking Russian nationalism on the one hand, and of the modernist, Protestant-style illusions of disincarnate modernism on the other hand. This preaching was to lay the foundations of the preaching of the Gospel in the Orthodox context so that then, once the Church inside Russia was free and we were strengthened and reinforced from Russia, we could accomplish this great task together.

Our second calling was to canonize the New Martyrs and Confessors. This was the only way of conquering atheism inside Russia and so working for the restoration of the Tsar, the Orthodox Monarchy, the protector of all Orthodox peoples and all who know that beyond the veil of this secular world there is a world to come, the world of spiritual reality, the real world. Atheism inside Russia could not be conquered by military means. Both the White Movement after 1917 and the Vlasov Movement of the Second World War failed precisely because they tried to use military means to conquer atheism. You can only fight evil spirits with spiritual weapons, as the Apostle Paul wrote: ‘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).

This need for spiritual weapons is why it took until 1981 for the Church Outside Russia to canonize the New Martyrs and Confessors. It should have happened much earlier but, very sadly, political and nationalistic elements in ROCOR resisted. The True White Movement, which is the essence of the whole Russian Orthodox Church, is a spiritual movement, not a political movement and those political elements had to be overcome before their canonization was possible. I personally knew many parishioners in various ROCOR churches, not least in the London parish, who were opposed to the canonization. To the scandal of the faithful, they thought in secular and nationalistic categories and held back our part of the Russian Church from accomplishing her mission and so fulfilling her destiny.

Q: What is the calling of ROCOR today?

A: As soon as Russia was freed, we were called on to ally ourselves with Her as closely as possible, thus strengthening both parts of the Church. The earthly remains of Russian Orthodox heroes like Ivan Ilyin had already been returned to the Centre, we too were to return, although spiritually we had always been there. In order to return, we had to avoid the various nationalistic and political traps that had been set us by the world. It is sad that some political, that is secular-minded, elements fell into them. The destiny of the whole Russian Diaspora and her missions was to return to the liberated Centre, in order to stand together with her in solidarity. The alternative was to fall into a hopeless provincialism and parochialism, which is exactly what befell the marginal fringes who broke away from the Church in the Diaspora for various ghetto-like sects, whether renovationist and modernist on the left (Paris, North America) or old calendarist and nationalist (ROCOR dissidents) on the right.

Q: You say ‘as soon as Russia was freed’. So why did ROCOR not reunite as soon as 1992, after the fall of the atheist government there?

A: There were naïve, patriotic, nostalgic and very emotional individuals in ROCOR, often very elderly, who did reunite or wanted to do so immediately. I do not judge them. But since 1972 I had known the leaders of the old ‘Moscow Patriarchate’, as it was called, from inside and I knew how corrupt it was, especially in the Diaspora. The fall of atheist government was one thing, the spread of a Non-Soviet and fully Orthodox mentality to the top of the Church took time.

For example, there was no possibility of unity with it in England until the self-cleansing of 2006 when at long last Moscow appointed an Orthodox and not a renovationist bishop, the present Archbishop Elisey. It was one thing not to have an atheist government after 75 years, but it was another for the old Soviet-style reflexes to change and see the practical consequences of freedom in the Church hierarchy, with the deaths of the old school of Soviet appointees who did incalculable harm to the Church, rejecting the faithful and self-sacrificing and persecuting the zealous and God-loving.

There were so many appalling scandals from that time. ROCOR could never unite with such spiritual impurity which was working against the Church. Our hearts are still deeply wounded by what we went through at that time and we feel so sorry for those who died without repentance. Indeed, the real Orthodox inside the old Soviet-style Patriarchate, like Archbishop Anatoly in England, actually told us to have nothing to do with the Patriarchate until it was inwardly free. I can remember him saying that in 2003. And inward freedom only came to it in May 2006. It then took us in ROCOR one year to get ourselves ready for the inevitable.

Q: What about those elements in the Church inside Russia who are themselves still today modernist or otherwise sectarian?

A: There are a few rather absurd and very old-fashioned individuals on the fringes of the Church inside Russia, leftist dissident leftovers from the recent Soviet past, like Fr George Kochetkov (whom the modernists wanted to serve at the Patriarchal Cathedral in London), the hippyish and disgraced Deacon Andrei Kuraev or naïve admirers of the heretic Fr Sergiy Bulgakov and modernists and dreamers of the schools of Schmemann, Bloom and other strange émigré cults, or others who are simplistic, rightist Old Ritualist-type sectarians, but they are all irrelevant to the mainstream. In a Church of 164 million, you will inevitably find a few marginal types. In Russia they have no authority or role whatsoever and people generally mock them.

A few eccentric individuals hardly prevent us from our great task of resurrecting Christian Imperial Russia, which we are all engaged in together, inside and outside Russia, in total unity of purpose. Everywhere in Russia you will find icons of the Royal Family – that is key. we work very closely with all who venerate them because they are Churched Orthodox. If Christian Imperial Russia is resurrected, then the whole Orthodox world will be resurrected, and so we can protect all who have values and understand that the ultimate destiny of all humanity is in the life to come and not in primitive Darwinism and pagan Secularism. It is foolish to spend much time dwelling on such marginal individuals; we must not waste our time looking at eccentric, individual and irrelevant trees who are so easy to resist, we must speak with and move forward with the great and irresistible forest, ever onwards to what God is calling us to do. We are people of destiny.

Q: At the 2006 Diaspora Council in San Francisco at least one voice spoke with concern about the present Patriarch who was then a Metropolitan. Was that a reasonable concern?

A: Thee greatest miracle of God is that He changes people. Look at the apostles, Peter lied, the disciples fled from the Cross, Paul persecuted the Church. But they all repented – except for Judas who despaired and hanged himself. Repentance is always possible – only pharisees, like those who criticized Christ’s visit to Zacchaeus, do not understand that. I think that the Soviet-born Metropolitan Kyrill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad who twenty years ago opposed reconciliation with the Church Outside Russia was one person, our Patriarch Kyrill is another. And make no mistake, he is OUR Patriarch. He has been transfigured by the grace and international responsibility of becoming Patriarch and is now able to represent all Russian Orthodox all around the world, as no-one else. I have only met him twice, but I am convinced of this. He understands us and has a profound sense of the role of the restoration of Holy Rus, of the global mission of the Russian Orthodox Church and Her Tradition. This is a miracle.

On Non-Orthodox

Q: Can you explain in the simplest of terms and without mentioning the word filioque the difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy?

A: Catholicism came into existence some 1,000 years ago, theologically and then immediately structurally. Although it preserved the Revelation of the Old Testament, that there is only One God, and the Revelation of the New Testament, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God become man, it failed to preserve the Revelation of the Church, that Christ is with us and we are with Him by the Holy Spirit. This happened when at the defining moment of its foundation Catholicism replaced the Holy Spirit with the Pope of Rome. In this way Catholicism replaced the authority of the Church, which is holiness, whose source is the Holy Spirit, with a mere man. Here is the difference between Catholicism, which is essentially a Trinitarian heresy, and the Church: The Pope or the Holy Spirit. As St Seraphim of Sarov, whose resurrection we now await, said: ‘The goal of Christian life is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit’. It is not to obey a man who lives in Rome.

Q: Do Catholicism and Protestantism have sacraments?

A: There are no sacraments outside the Church, however, there are sacramental forms. These have been preserved as a heritage, as vestiges from the past. In other words, outside the Church there are wine-glasses (however deformed and defective they may be) but they contain no wine. Thus, Catholicism has seven sacramental forms and classical Protestantism (the sort that baptizes by water in the Name of the Holy Trinity) has one – baptism. Thus, in receiving people from what I call ‘Frankish religion’ (Catholicism/Protestantism) into Christianity, the Church does not absolutely need to repeat the sacramental form (though She can if She considers it better to do so in the specific circumstances). What is vital is to communicate the wine, not the wine-glass. For example, Uniats have a wine-glass which is almost identical in form to the Orthodox wine-glass, but it still contains no wine.

Q: Are you saying then that Catholics and Protestants have no grace at all? That seems harsh.

A: No, I am not saying that at all. That is old calendarist ‘light-switch’ black and white ideology – one moment you have grace, the next you do not. The truth is much more subtle.

According to Orthodox Christian theology, the Holy Spirit can come to us in two different ways. Firstly, He comes to us through the Body of Christ, the Church. This only works if we are real Orthodox, that is, practising members of the Church, living limbs (and not withered or nominal branches) of the Body of Christ. If we are outside the Church, we can receive no grace in this way. Secondly, however, the Holy Spirit can come to us directly. This is what happened to the prophets of the Old Testament, who were also outside the Church, and this is also what happens to those outside the Church who receive the calling of God to join the Church, whether they were first-century Jews and Greeks, third-century Latins, sixth-century English, tenth-century Kievans, nineteenth-century Alaskans, Chinese and Japanese, or twenty-first century Western European Catholics and Protestants.

Q: Speaking on the subject of married priests, a French Catholic bishop recently said that the life of Orthodox priests is ‘infernal’ because they have to combine family life and parish life, and therefore he is against married priests. What would you say?

A: The life of an Orthodox priest is certainly difficult. But who said that it would be easy to get into Paradise? I find it amazing that a Catholic bishop would think that it is easy to get into Paradise! This is the same spirit that asks why we Orthodox stand at services, whereas they sit down in comfort. They have no concept of the ascetic. As for Catholic priests – and I know many of them in various European countries – many (usually the best ones) have a mistress and children, many others – and I have met them – are homosexuals and pedophiles. Recently I was speaking to a Polish taxi-driver in Colchester. He comes from Krakow, which is the Polish Canterbury. He told me that he had made his living there ferrying priests, monks and seminarians to brothels. When I was in Portugal 20 years ago, I visited the Portuguese Canterbury, a city called Braga. Local people called it the city of the two Ps – priests and prostitutes. Now that is what I call infernal. What infernal hypocrisy on the part of that Catholic bishop…Has he met the pedophile former Catholic Bishop of Glasgow?

Q: How would you describe the Church of England and the rest of the Anglican Communion?

A: Anglicanism is a Gothic shell, the shell of Catholicism, a kind of Protestant Uniatism, preserving an outward semblance, even a ritual imitation of a sort of Catholicism, but devoid of even Catholic content. The Church of England is State-founded and State-run, founded by a mass murderer and destroyer of monastic life, an English Lenin, who like him also died of syphilis. The Head of the real Church is no such murderous blasphemer, but Christ the Son of God.

Q: Do you think that the Church of England will one day have a female Archbishop of Canterbury?

A: It would be thoroughly logical. Since any secular institution can be headed by a man or a woman, why should the Church of England be any different? As a matter of fact it was a woman, Elizabeth I, who composed the doctrines of the Church of England and it is a woman, Elizabeth II, who heads it at present. Only misogynists can be against female heads of secular organizations.

Q: Do you think the Church of England will eventually introduce homosexual marriage?

A: It is highly likely. It always takes orders from the British Establishment, whether on its doctrines, the EU, fox-hunting or buggery, which is so widespread in that public-school Establishment. The Church of England has always followed the government of the day, ignoring the truism that the American writer Mark Twain expressed: ‘Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it’.

Q: Can those of what you call ‘Frankish religion’ help us in combating secularism, abortion, euthanasia etc?

A: Individually definitely, but sadly the institutions that such virtuous individuals belong to are actually part of the problem, not part of the solution. More and more of them are realizing this. For instance, I was talking to a group of anti-abortion Catholics last year and I saw that they were horrified by their own episcopate, whom they completely distrusted.

Q: Are any of the Orthodox jurisdictions in England close to the Church of England?

A: Virtually all the 300 or so English members of the Antiochian jurisdiction in this country are former clergy and laypeople of the Establishment Church of England. Many seem to be profoundly Anglican, using the Anglican calendar, church-buildings and vestments, so I am not sure why they made the change. They seem to be dedicated to converting other Establishment Anglicans to themselves, ordaining men within days of their reception into the Church in order to do so. This policy of Anglicans only seems very narrow to me, as it repels the vast majority. This is not the way of the Church – our mission is to the people, to the masses, to the whole country, to the 99% of people in England who have never had any real link with the Church of England.

Thus, I know of one ex-Anglican Antiochian priest who has banned the use of any language other than English in his chapel and sends away Romanians telling them that he has no time for them, yet spends hours with prospective Anglican converts, whom he receives very quickly and then very soon lapse. He rejects reality. The clergy are here to serve the people of God, not ourselves, not our personal fantasies. This is just Anglican clericalism. Another wealthy ex-Anglican (in another jurisdiction, it must be said) told me that he liked ‘small churches’ with select groups of English people only and did not want any ‘foreigners’ in his church. This is typical of Establishment racism, regardless of jurisdiction.

Q: But surely the mere existence of the Antiochian jurisdiction in the UK is because of Greek and Russian racism? The Anglicans in question asked to join both the Greek and Russian Churches first and were refused on racial grounds, so the Anglicans got into the Orthodox house ‘by the back window’, that is, through a special arrangement with Antioch.

A: I absolutely agree that the then Soviet-enslaved Moscow Patriarchate and the Church of Constantinople refused them, the latter because of racism and both because they were not politically free to receive them because of their ecumenist compromises. However, the Anglicans in question made one huge mistake on account of their Establishment mentality – they came with their own agenda and list of demands. In this way they refused the Cross, that is, they refused to ask to join ROCOR, the free Russian Church which had and has no ecumenist compromises. We would have received all sincere Anglicans happily, only we would have made sure that they became Orthodox first and would have trained their future clergy how to celebrate etc.

It is no good joining the Orthodox Church without first becoming Orthodox. Otherwise it is just the religion of the Establishment, Anglicanism, or Anglo-Catholicism, with icons. All Churched Orthodox reject that; we know in our guts that it is wrong. What has happened since their refusal to come to ROCOR is that the ex-Anglicans in question have become marginal, finding themselves on an isolated wing of the Church, outside the Orthodox mainstream. So much has been wasted in this way. Similarly Establishment Anglicans who joined the Church of Constantinople have had to undergo Hellenization, having to take on hyper-Greek names like Kallistos, Pankratios, Aristovoulos, Panteleimon etc., whereas the Greek clergy themselves anglicize their names and are called John, Gregory, Peter, Paul etc!

On the Contemporary Western World and the End of the World

Q: What would you say of the present spiritual state of Western Europe in general?

A: Western European countries are increasingly and paradoxically typified by Secularism on the one hand and Islamism on the other hand. For example, the name Mohammed in its various spellings last year became the most common boy’s name in London and there is a wave of mosque-building throughout Western Europe. However, at the same time the secularists who control Western governments and media are completely indifferent to the tens of thousands of Christian victims of Islamist fanaticism throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa and the tens of thousands of Christian victims of the Nazi junta in Kiev. Why? Because those being killed ‘are not Charlie’, in other words, not anti-Christian secularists like themselves. And who will say at the end of time: ‘Je suis Charlie’? It is Antichrist.
So in the West we have the perfect combination of Secularism and Islamism.

Q: Are there not aspects of Islam that we can appreciate?

A: Moderate or Traditional Islam, as opposed to Islamism, condemns violence and keeps certain universal practices like other traditional religions. Thus, Muslim women dress modestly, for instance, wearing a head covering, a universal practice except in the post-1914 secular West.

Q: More and more Western countries allow euthanasia. What do you think of this?

A: In his short story ‘The Veiled Lodger’, written over 100 years ago, a secular writer, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle said: ‘If there is not some compensation hereafter, then the world is a cruel jest…The example of patient suffering is in itself the most precious of all lessons to an impatient world’. In other words, euthanasia, like any other form of suicide, is the result of an ideology that does not believe in the immortality of the soul and in life after death. All belief rejects euthanasia, but where there is no belief, there is suicide. In this sense euthanasia is symbolic of today’s Western world as a whole – as a suicidal world.

Q: What do you think of the experiment with the Large Hadron Collider on the French and Swiss borders? Some people say that it could lead to a catastrophe.

A: I am not a scientist and am simply not qualified to have an opinion and say whether it will lead to a catastrophe or whether it is perfectly safe. However, since it a vast and vastly expensive experiment concerning the nature of matter, I think we can say that it does represent the Western obsession with the material world as opposed to the spiritual world. In general, I am suspicious of such large experiments and operations. As someone said centuries ago: ‘The chief proof of man’s greatness lies in his perception of his smallness’. And as has been said more recently, ‘Small is Beautiful’. In other words, this is all a question of humility. But I am not able to say any more than that.

Q: How should we vote in the forthcoming elections in the UK?

A: Pray and then vote according to your conscience, voting for whomever you consider to be the lesser evil.

Q: Is there a change you would like to see in Great Britain?

A: I would like to see the concept of ‘Britain’ rejected once and for all. It would mean freedom for all of us from tyrannical ‘Britain’ and its Norman Establishment. As a dream, I would like to see four independent but friendly and co-operating nations, England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Their representatives would gather in a round building, a ‘Council of the Isles’, on a high point on the Isle of Man, from where alone the four countries in question are all visible.

Q: Where is the Western world going?

A: The USA controls the Western countries through their elites which have been installed by US PR companies as feudal vassals. All that the Western elites do is in imitation of the USA, its clothes, its food, its television series, its media. Here are four recent statistics about the sex and violence of the USA, which God-fearing Americans know and for which they detest the White House:

85% of the world’s pornography comes from the USA.

Every day 24 former GIs who served in Iraq and Afghanistan commit suicide.

In March 2015 the American police killed twice as many people than the British police have killed since 1900.

In a recent global poll representatives from all the countries of the world, except for the USA, UK and France, declared that Public Enemy No 1 is the USA.

Should not such statistics make us think? It seems to me that either the Western world, especially the USA, is on the point of some great disaster, a hurricane, a tornado, a volcano, an earthquake, a tidal wave, or else it is on the point of repentance, of realizing its foolishness and turning back. It can go either way, but it cannot continue with impunity as now. It is not possible. Our actions always have consequences. It is called responsibility.

Q: Is Antichrist coming soon?

A: Nobody knows if he has even been born, let alone if he is coming to power. However there are clear signs that his coming is being PREPARED. Notably, there are these four signs: worldwide sodomy imposed by Washington and willingly promoted by the Western European elite; the genocide and expulsion of all Christians from of the Middle East; the war between Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims, actively encouraged and financed by Zionism; the invasion of the western marches of Rus by the forces of Satan and their occupation of Kiev, the Mother of Russian Cities.

As yet, however, the Temple has not been rebuilt on Zion and, in general, we should not despair and certainly not fall into fatalism. I think that the coming of Antichrist has been delayed many times in history, not least last year, when the Ukrainian people rose up and fought the Satanic forces that the White House has put into power in Kiev. Despite the American threat of nuclear war, Russia did not rise to the bait and sweep away the junta within a fortnight, as it could have. That would have led to the end of the world with nuclear war started by the Nazi neocons in Washington and their paid allies: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Condoleeza Rice, Tony Blair, Carl Bildt and all those other satanists who have spoken directly of destroying the Church of God. As long as we fight and resist Satan, Antichrist cannot come. It all depends on us.

Q: ‘It all depends on us’. But what can we do?

A: At present we are resisting and fighting. There is no time to lose. Together all Orthodox who have an understanding of Orthodoxy have to work together. The visit of the new Greek Prime Minister to President Putin is a great sign of hope. President Putin gave the Greek leader, who says he is an atheist but in fact is just spiritually inexperienced, an icon which had been stolen by the Nazis from Greece. This was highly symbolic. The soul of Greece has indeed been stolen by the West. Now is the time of restoration. This is a personal message to the young Greek leader, but also a message to the whole Greek people. Restore your soul and give up on Nazism, both the old form and the new neocon form of the US/EU.

It is the same in Romania and Bulgaria. Satan is now trying to steal the souls of the Ukraine, Serbia, Moldova, Georgia – everywhere the same processes. Even in Western Europe there are those of us who are also fighting – for the liberation of the Western Lands from the West, for the ‘de-Europeanization of Europe’ and the restoration of Orthodoxy here too. Together, as conscious Orthodox, as the Army of Christ, we can conquer the Satanic spirit of Mammon and its sinister and idolatrous forces.

When asked how Russia could defeat the far superior American armed forces (each year the USA spends eleven times more on arms than Russia), over twenty years ago now the great and newly-revealed St Paisios the Athonite replied: ‘The Russians will win because the angels will help them’. We see such huge solidarity between all the conscious Orthodox peoples, from Damascus to Nicosia, from Belgrade to Kiev, from Bucharest to Sofia, from Athens to Moscow.

The time will come when Constantinople will be freed. And make no mistake Constantinople will not be freed so much from the Turks as from the Americans. But first there will be a Tsar in Russia for all Orthodox and he will call a real and free Council of all the Orthodox, not a diplomatic nicety. And that Council will not waste time talking about the US-imposed secularist agenda of human rights, racial discrimination and gender equality, it will thunder out the truths of the Church, about the Nation and the Family, which the Western world has deliberately forgotten in the cold and dark tomb, where Satan has buried its soul.

And then there will be a new generation of bishops in Constantinople, not appointees of the US State Department, but taken from the monks of Mt Athos, who, never forget it, are in the jurisdiction of Constantinople and who so eagerly support and pray for the Risen Russia. The old decadence will be gone and those pseudo-bishops who parrot the politically correct doctrines taught them by the Zionist CIA, visit synagogues and change the services will be gone. Great difficulties, but also great days, lie ahead for us all. The time will come, as St John of Shanghai prophesied, when you will hear ‘Christ is Risen’ shouted all through the Orthodox world, with an intensity and faith and conviction and unity that you have never heard before.

On Easter Night, after the Gospels at the Liturgy, I heard an insistent voice in my head speaking in Russian. It said: ‘Budet Tsar v Rossii’ – ‘There will be a Tsar in Russia’. Do not ask me how or when or who. That was the voice. I wonder if others heard the same voice?

Christ is Risen!

Last Chance for Europe

‘The countries which today so criticize Russia are in fact trying to deprive Russia of her traditions, memory and territorial logic. It is commonly said that in order to control and deceive peoples and countries with impunity, they must first be deprived of their memory and hope. In my view, such games will end badly – above all for those who play them. Everyone will become the same and lose their initiative, particularities and individual roots, all for the sake of a few international slogans. And, if I may put it like this, they want to ‘sloganize’ Russia. Fortunately, Russia has a solid Slav foundation. And I consider that in defending its independence, Russia is at the same time defending our independence too’.
Prince Sixte-Henri de Bourbon-Parme

The Western world is isolated. Although it likes to call itself ‘the international community’, it is no such thing. Indeed, even the phrase ‘the Western world’ is inappropriate because a great many Western people are wholly opposed to the policies of ‘the Western world’. In fact ‘the Western world’ is not a geographical construct, but an ideological one. The phrase ‘the USA’ is also totally inappropriate, since many Americans are thoroughly opposed to today’s ‘Western world’, not least native Americans. In fact, by ‘the Western world’ we are talking about a small but immensely powerful global elite which controls the politics, economies and media of ‘Western countries’, despite their peoples, and wants hegemony over the whole world. But what does even the phrase ‘Western countries’ mean?

Today the phrase ‘Western countries’ means the elite of the USA, Canada, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and most EU countries. This elite also has agents in other countries, sometimes though by no means always Jews, such as Petro Poroshenko (real name, Waltzman) and Igor Kolomoysky in the Ukraine or the vilely murdered Boris Nemtsov in Russia. Here we immediately affirm that we utterly detest all anti-semitism and resolutely stand in defence of ordinary Jews who have suffered so much in history, pointing out that Western elite Jews are not Jews at all in the historic or religious sense, but uprooted Zionists. And the difference between a Zionist and a Jew is as huge as that between a neocon bankster and the average US citizen struggling to avoid foreclosure or between a Brussels bureaucrat and the average EU citizen struggling to pay bills.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union a generation ago, this hubristic Western elite has embarked on its ambitious ‘New World Order’ campaign to acquire worldwide hegemony. As regards Eurasia, the Western elite has since 1945 controlled the vassal archipelagos at either end of Eurasian Continent – Japan and the British Isles. Thus, as regards Great Britain, the US elite first dismantled its Empire in order to build a US Empire in its place, then it forced it to join the future European Union. It has recently strongly objected to any attempt by the British people to liberate itself by referendum from EU slavery, has strongly objected to the desire of many Scots to liberate themselves from the tyranny of London and has recently protested at any attempt to reduce defence (= offence) spending, since the British armed forces are in fact only ‘partner’ forces under US orders. The UK is in fact just a US aircraft carrier off the coast of Western Europe.

The US elite has used the elites of both the UK and Japan against the national interests of their subject populations to penetrate further into the Eurasian mainland, whether into Siberia, in the US-encouraged and British-financed anti-Russian war of 1904-5 and in the 1950s in Korea, or into Western Europe. Indeed, since the US invasion of Western Europe in 1944 (carried out in order to prevent the Red Army arriving on the shores of the Atlantic), the US elite has been trying to control the Western tip of Europe, penetrating ever more eastwards since 1989, using the puppet EU as its Trojan Horse. However, there are now active forces in the EU, which are at last awake and are opposing vassalization. Curiously, these forces belong politically to both left and right.

Thus, mainly in southern or ex-Catholic Europe, in Spain, the Basque Country, Catalonia, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland – we can see left-wing movements resisting US colonization. On the other hand, mainly in northern or ex-Protestant Europe, in England, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Austria, Scandinavia, we can see right-wing movements resisting US colonization. Why this difference between left and right? It all depends on their local history since 1945. By and large, in countries where oppressive right-wing ideologies have been in power, resistance comes from the left. By and large, in countries where oppressive left-wing ideologies have been in power, resistance comes from the right.

In a similar way, in recently colonized Central and Eastern Europe, there is increasing nostalgia for Communism, oppressive, but everyone had a job and a dwelling, there was little crime or insecurity, there was free education and medical care and the young were not forced to leave their homes and families to emigrate in order to find work. Here, where US vassalization has gone further, including in Non-EU countries, with American ministers appointed in Georgia, Estonia and the Ukraine, the US takeover of the media in Serbia, CIA torture camps in several Eastern European countries such as Lithuania, US or EU political appointees in Sweden, Finland, Romania, Bulgaria and Montenegro, generously-financed US regime-change agents in the Ukraine, Armenia and Turkmenistan, resistance is also growing. The adoption of Wild West capitalism and mafia politics, the law of the jungle where there is no social justice, has not brought happiness.

On the left-wing of resistance and sovereignty stand thinkers and politicians like the Americans Noam Chomsky and Paul Craig Roberts, the Canadian Naomi Klein, in Germany Gregor Gysi, in Scotland Alex Salmond, in Czechia Milosh Zeman, in Greece the leaders of Syriza and in Spain of Podemos. On the right wing of resistance and sovereignty stand thinkers and politicians like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan in the USA, Philippe de Villiers, Marine Le Pen, Alain de Benoist and the late Dominique Venner in France, Nigel Farage in England and Viktor Orban in Hungary. Whatever we think of their politics or personal eccentricities and however much we may disagree with them, they at least all stand united in their opposition to the one size fits all globalization of the elite and against the post-modernist neocon ‘war against all who disagree with us’.

The more spiritually sensitive European resistance workers are beginning to realize that only the return to European roots, ultimately to the European Tradition of the first millennium, can act as the antidote to the ‘Western’ elite, with its EU totalitarian ‘liberalism’ and NATO military hysteria, which have both been artificially created by the neocon warmongers of Washington. The Brave New World of the New World Order which the elite has sought to create for a generation is nothing but the justification for its own greed and depravity. And that is precisely what all the saints of Jerusalem and Rome, Greece and Italy, Egypt and Syria, Gaul and Ireland, Wales and England, Bulgaria and Serbia, Russia and Romania have always fought against – greed and depravity.

However, having infiltrated and largely vassalized the Western tip of Eurasia, the real aim of the elite is to go much further. It is to acquire control over the huge natural riches of what the geopoliticians call ‘the heartland’, that is, northern Eurasia, which stretches half-way around the world – the Russian Federation, over one eighth of the planet’s land mass. As a result, the Russian Federation is trying to create friends all around its frontiers, forming the Eurasian Economic Union, creating alliances with China, Syria, Iran, India, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, Slovakia, Czechia, and also further afield, with Latin America and Africa. It wishes to create a network on its periphery, a global alliance of sovereign nations which believe that their civilizations and traditions, their national cultures and identities, are more important than the Western elite’s idols of the US dollar and the ‘freedom’ to be greedy and depraved. As Nigel Farage, who comes from the land of Thatcherite monetarism, bravely said: ‘Some things are more important than money.’

All of this would be mere politics and therefore have little place on this website if it were not for one vital fact. Standing far beyond the petty interests of provincial and narrow-minded Russian nationalists, the multinational Russian Federation is by far the largest Orthodox Christian country in the world, sole heir to the Christian Roman Empire. Although its spiritual rebirth is only beginning and is still being held back by the weight of the recent past and has far to go, its positive direction, unlike that of the Western world, is clear. Russia’s destiny as the Third Rome of the Last Times, the last Christian Empire, is to rebalance a divided and tormented planet, to resist Satan in the last times though the traditional values which it is now recovering after the three generations of the demonic possession of Western-imposed atheism. And those values are love, mercy, non-acquisition, personal righteousness, social justice, generosity, hospitality and self-sacrifice.

For this reason, healthy spiritual forces in the Western world, as elsewhere outside it, today defend the Russia which is being reborn and also seek her support. Europe in particular stands at the crossroads. Is Europe to survive or not? After more than three generations of Americanization on the one hand and more than one generation of Islamization on the other hand, can it survive? Only if it refers back to its roots in its historic identity in Christianity because the roots of all civilizations are in spiritual inspiration, in Faith. Any civilization which abandons its spiritual roots withers and dies. This is the inevitable law of history. To throw off the modern yoke of the idolatry of the dollar, the law of the jungle, and return to the truths of Galilee is the only way in which Europe can be saved.

‘Europe must stop writing its future with an American pen’

Le Figaro, 23 February 2015

Interviewed below by the famous French Le Figaro newspaper, the well-known French politician and former French Presidential candidate, Philippe de Villiers, welcomes the Minsk accords. He encourages François Hollande and Angela Merkel to draw closer to Vladimir Putin to build a Greater Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals. Philippe de Villiers, an aristocrat, devout Catholic with a large family and a French patriot, is the creator of Puy du Fou (a highly popular theme park on French history) and the founder of the political party, The Movement for France. In the mid-1980s, he welcomed Solzhenitsyn to a national shrine in the Vendee in the west of France to commemorate victims of the atheist genocide of French peasantry and nobility after the French Revolution. He was a candidate for the French Presidency in 1995 and in 2007 and knows President Putin personally. He is also a prolific writer and publicist.

Interviewed by Alexandre DeVecchio

Le Fig: What do you think of the Minsk agreement negotiated by François Hollande and Angela Merkel with Vladimir Putin?

De Villiers: The Minsk agreement is extremely important because it involves four new factors. Firstly, it has permitted the protagonists to get out of the logic of war. The diplomatic path of small steps is a sign of a possible peaceful future. Secondly, two major European states, France and Germany, have led the negotiations and are committed to implementing the agreement alongside Russia. It is plain that neither the EU nor America has the capacity or the will to make peace there. This agreement shows that it is only when Europe talks to Europe that a real peace becomes visible – it is the Europe of its nations. Thirdly, the agreement opens the way to the only solution that exists for the territorial unity of Ukraine: the accepting by Kiev of a specific status for the east of the country with the right to its native language, Russian. Finally, as for the difference with the September agreement, this one has a calendar for each phase.

Le Fig: Once does not make a habit – so you welcome the initiative of François Hollande?

DeVilliers: Yes, because Europe must stop writing its future with an American pen. François Hollande has acted as a head of state without regard to American orders. He was able to resist the insistence of the United States on the Ukraine joining NATO. Furthermore, we must encourage France to go beyond this first phase of liberation. François Hollande should now deliver the Mistral ship that Russia ordered and so respect the commercial contract signed by France and paid for by Russia for a billion euros. He should also lift the sanctions which are today acts of war that are more unfavourable to the French economy than to the Russian economy and which do not affect the American economy at all. But the most important thing, rather than insist on building an artificial Europe of Maastricht, he will be to prepare the only viable Europe that makes sense: to lay the groundwork for a grand strategic and cultural partnership with Russia – Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.

Le Fig: The agreement has already been violated by Ukrainian separatists. Can we trust Vladimir Putin?

DeVilliers: When you get back to the source of these occurrences, you note the permanent falsehood of the EU and the fantasies of the Western press. The ceasefire, to my knowledge, is being observed along the front line, except at Debaltsevo, a special problem that came up just before the Minsk agreement. But even there, today the heavy weapons are being withdrawn. Monitoring mechanisms are being put into place and the heads of state are talking to each other. When the media report that Russian trucks laden with humanitarian aid are laden with munitions, I have to ask: in this time of satellites that see everything, of Iphones that record for the record, what’s stopping them giving us proof? Where are the photographs?

LeFig: The idea of exporting the Puy du Fou idea could be turned down in Russia – is your unconditional support for Putin out of self-interest?

DeVilliers: Just the opposite. Having let Russia in on the advance planning for this Franco-Russian project, I discovered two things. First, that Russia is profoundly European. All her culture, all her elites and all her people look towards Europe. Solzhenitsyn told me once: “Don’t make the mistake of turning your back on Russia. It’s a matter of your future.”

Furthermore, I discovered that Putin is a genuine head of state. I also found out why in the West the elite one-worlders never cease criticizing him: America wants Europe to be the 51st star on the American flag. For that, they have to keep Europe sworn to NATO. Vladimir Putin is the perfect excuse, the ideal devil. Let us not forget the origins of the Ukrainian mess. Firstly, a coup d’etat fomented by NATO. Then the mistake of the Ukrainian government, the forbidding of the Russian language, finally, the US insistence on the Ukraine joining NATO. How can you imagine that the Russians could agree to see NATO on their doorstep? Vladimir Putin has no wish for the dismemberment of Ukraine. He simply wishes the recognition of the native Russian language in the Russian-speaking regions, a status for the regions and finally the neutrality of Ukraine vis-a-vis NATO.

Le Fig: Russia seems to have recovered a certain national pride. Isn’t there a risk of this turning into excessive nationalism?

DeVilliers: The difference with France is as follows: in Russia there is a real restoration of moral, civic, patriotic and spiritual values. The children of Russia are learning pride in being Russian. You tell Russians of Russia, of its greatness, its rich heritage, its Eurasian spectrum. And what are we telling the children of France? That France is a disgrace, that the French are a bunch of racists and that patriotism is a bore. There is more freedom of speech in Russia than among us. As Philippe Muray prophesied, we are stuck in a cage of -phobes: islamophobes, xenophobes, europhobes, homophobes. Nobody shifts! And we have a political class that’s been drained, sanitized, stuck through the microwave that blesses the splitting of society between secularists who make a spiritual void and Islamists who fill that void.

Le Fig: This doesn’t prevent the Russians themselves from experiencing strong ethnic and cultural tensions, does it?

DeVilliers: The difference with French-style integration is clear. There are in Russia 20 million Muslims out of 140 million inhabitants. Vladimir Putin applies the ancient prudent principle: “We lives in Rome like the Romans; we lives in Russia like the Russians.” In France those who wish to believe that secularism and human rightsism are enough to resolve the problem are manipulators or cowards. There is but one way to integrate our country, by becoming French!

Le Fig: Now that negotiations between the European Union and Greece are stalled, might Tsipras turn towards Russia?

DeVilliers: As far as the European oligarchy is concerned, Tsipras is in a state of mortal sin. He will soon be sacrificed on the Parthenon since he doesn’t kneel before the euro and he admits to a penchant toward Russia. He finds some virtues in the devil. But the worshippers of Brussels and Frankfurt have never understood that redemption by the euro doesn’t work for European economies. Greece will leave the euro: the negotiations will only postpone it. The European Union of today is an insane attempt at miracle-working, to annihilate the nation-state, national borders and to turn the peoples and industrial activities over to the masters of internationalization, who get immense profits from it.

Le Fig: What will the Europe of tomorrow look like?

DeVilliers: The idea concocted today, by the Eurocrats and the one-world elites, of a free trade agreement with the US will make Europe into a market annexed to America, turns its back on the future and on common sense. What I fault in their Europe is being an American Europe — a simple extension, both economic and cultural, of the United States. To predict the future, we could say “The European Union is dead! Long live Europe!” The true Europe, the Greater Europe, is from the Atlantic to the Pacific and that will rediscover the cradle of her cultural and ancestral alliances. The Europe of Queen Anne of Kiev, the Russian queen who married a French king. The Europe that rediscovers the old and good ideas that have led the world ever since men invented the triptych, sovereignty, borders and identities.

The American Nightmare: On the Globalization of Sleeplessness

America is a great country, but its downfall will be in greed and lust.

St John of Shanghai

Every people and every country has gone through turning points in its history in order to get to its present stage. Some turning points are positive, others are negative, many are both; in all cases they are epoch-making. For example in the history of England, everybody would agree that the genocidal Norman Invasion of 1066 and the 16th century Reformation when the State exchanged the popular religion for another were such turning points. However, there have been many other turning points in English history, whose relative importance historians discuss and the balance of whose positive and negative consequences are controversial.

As regards the USA, how did it get to its present stage as a Superpower seeking world hegemony, with bases in some 130 foreign bases? How has the country of such an open, generous, warm-hearted and welcoming people become so strongly disliked? Why are its only, and even then sometimes critical, friends to be found in the Anglosphere of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and in vassal-like countries in parts of the EU and in Japan? Why is the USA so isolated? Why in so many parts of the world is there such fear of and hatred for the USA, a fear and hatred which have increased almost exponentially since 1945 with the ritual burning of US flags almost worldwide? In other words, when did the American Dream turn into the American Nightmare?

There are some who would suggest that the USA was corrupt even before it began. There never was an American Dream, only ever an American Nightmare. The USA was, so they say, founded by a mixture of sectarian Puritans, unable to accept the religion of the majority in England, and greedsters, who wanted to steal a relatively empty land and its rich resources, had no qualms about slaughtering the native inhabitants, settling their country and exploiting it with imported slaves. In the 18th century, so they say, such was the greed of the slave-owners in control that they started a war against the colonial power and its tax system. In this they were influenced by revolutionary masonry, whose symbols appear on the dollar bill and mark the city planning of Washington D.C. to this day. The USA, so they say, is simply a colony which got out of control and became deregulated, living not by moderate European values and codes, but by extremes, by the law of the jungle, by gun law, becoming ‘the Wild West’.

Many would reply that the above is a totally unfair and jaundiced view. There was, so they say, much that was good in the early settlers who lived with the Native Americans in relative peace and brought Christian values of hard work, morality, freedom, justice and humility. This was the American Dream.

A more substantial number of Americans, especially in the South, would suggest that the rot set in only with the American Civil War (1861-65) with over 600,000 dead. Then the greedsters took control from the Christian elements in the nation. Then, so they say, the industrial North under the cunning Lincoln decided to ravage the South in order to take slaves, who had lived in Patriarchal conditions in the South, to wage slavery in grim and fast-expanding factories in the North. For them the US Civil War was an act of genocide, which destroyed a whole civilization of Southern rural and agrarian values for a Northern industrial world of filth and exploitation, which destroyed the Shire for Mordor. The concept of ‘a wonderful life’ of Confederation, of unity in diversity, local and family values, was lost for the Big Brother world of capitalist and centralized Unionism, ultimately of Imperialism. And after the Civil War, so they say, there were no more checks on the slaughter of Native Americans, who were increasingly herded into giant concentration camps established on the worst and poorest lands, called ‘reservations’, so that their lands could be exploited.

Many would reply that this is a myth. The economy of the South was based on slavery and racism, the Civil War was about freedom, justice, development, progress and unity. The Union was a great victory over tyranny, backwardness, ignorance and racism.

Others assert that nothing really went wrong until the USA began violently stealing land from Mexico in the 1840s and then creating overseas colonies, notably in the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Cuba at the end of the 19th century. This, so they say, led to further meddling in Latin America and then overseas, across the Atlantic in Europe after 1917 and 1941, across the Pacific against the Japanese Empire after 1941 and then worldwide after the Second World War. The USA, so they say, should have remained independent, sovereign and in isolation from others.

Many would reply that, on the contrary, so-called US ‘meddling’ was actually massive self-sacrifice, that US heroism saved suicidal Europe from itself twice, saved the Pacific Region from Japanese imperialism and then numerous countries from Communist and other tyrannies.

Others, perhaps more conspiracy theorists, affirm that all was basically well until Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963. He was, so they say, the last obstacle to the complete domination of the USA by the ‘military-industrial complex’ (Eisenhower’s phrase), the annihilation of ‘small town America’ and its values and worldwide meddling. Only after Kennedy did there come the catastrophe of Vietnam, CIA-installed right-wing military puppet juntas in South Vietnam, the Philippines (Marcos), Greece (the colonels), Iraq (Saddam Hussein), Chile (Pinochet), Argentina (the generals) etc, which always turned sour through the particular junta’s fanatical nationalism, in Cyprus, Kuwait, the Falklands or elsewhere. The same has happened today in the Ukraine, where, again in the name of mythical ‘freedom and democracy’, the CIA, and so the USA, has backed another loser, once more been spending billions of dollars on setting up, backing, training and equipping criminal nationalist oligarchs and war criminals, as usual the most hated, awful, corrupt and genocidal people in the country, such as Poroshenko-Waltzman. After all, so they say, until Kennedy, the USA was a Christian country and there was no question of its administration rejecting puritanism in favour of lust and spreading sodomy worldwide.

The above thoughts are but pebbles dropped into a pool. It is for American readers to watch for any ripples and decide whether all or part or any of the above is true. We wish the American people only the best, whatever they may think of both worthy and unworthy US administrations. What concerns us is that perhaps the original American Dream, founded on Christian values, has been forgotten, first for greed and then for lust, that there may be a cultural time-bomb ticking in Washington, which will one day be set off by the accumulation of historical errors over 250 years and more, and this may create an American Nightmare. And if that should happen, then the whole world will be unable to sleep.

Europe’s Fateful Hour of Decision

With US Special Forces filmed taking part in the war against the Ukraine, Ukrainian freedom fighters hearing English, French, Polish and Flemish being spoken by mercenaries, many of whom have been killed, US arms and NATO uniforms being found in Donetsk, and US General Ben Hodges, Commander of the US Army in Europe, seen handing out medals to wounded Kiev junta soldiers, the Obama regime is already de facto at war with the Ukraine and therefore with Russia.

According to press reports, during his five-hour meeting with President Hollande and Chancellor Merkel last Friday, President Putin warned his European counterparts that he would not allow the Obama regime to arm the terrorist regime in Kiev any further against the Ukrainian people. He stated that should the US do so, ‘total war’ would be the result within a matter of weeks.

Chancellor Merkel has also warned her Western counterparts against starting such a total war. She was alarmed by a German intelligence document, provided to President Putin by her at Friday’s meeting, estimating the true total number of deaths in the war so far at 50,000. This is ten times the officially announced figure which has repeatedly been cited in the mindless, US-run, propaganda-filled Western media.

According to the former Italian Prime Minister, Mario Monti, speaking on Italian television on Monday 9 February, the USA is manipulating NATO and certain Eastern European countries into starting total war.

During a visit to Sochi, the Russian President publicly warned the Obama regime against its reckless actions, stating: ‘There is an attempt to upset the existing world order with one undisputed leader who wants to remain such, thinking that he is allowed everything, while others are only allowed what he allows and only in his interests’.

However, while the current Putin-Merkel-Hollande peace bid now being discussed in Minsk is the last chance to avoid total war, the Obama regime is intent on exactly that. The pro-sodomy US Vice President Biden has vowed to arm the Kiev junta. But if the use of US weapons in the killing of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians continues, Russia will support a large-scale military offensive to free the peoples of the Ukraine in a campaign which would involve liberating Kiev itself.

The Kiev junta currently has only around 41,000 regular troops plus about 20,000 irregulars who joined volunteer battalions to fight against the 100,000 Ukrainians and has lost 220 tanks and more than 480 armoured vehicles since August of last year through combat, breakdown, capture and above all mass surrender to the Ukrainian freedom fighters, whom they have joined. The fact is that at the outbreak of the war in March 2014, Kiev had only 6,000 combat troops, only a sixth of its aircraft and anti-aircraft systems were functional and only four of the Ukrainian Navy’s vessels were combat-ready.

To make matters worse, over 16,000 former Ukrainian military personnel defected to Russia when the Crimea decided to return to Russia in March. The rest of Kiev’s ill-equipped 100,000 troops are not combat-ready. Young men are fleeing the Ukraine in their thousands, often for freedom in Russia, in order to avoid being conscripted for a US-decided civil war which they and their parents oppose and which in any case is unwinnable. In its desperation Kiev has established what are called ‘barrier squads’ and sent them to the front lines to shoot any soldier who attempts to retreat.

The oligarch-puppet President Poroshenko, who ironically made most of his money by selling off the arms of the Ukraine’s armed forces to Third World countries, has lost control of the military situation. His nation’s currency has collapsed, his administration is bankrupt, workers are not being paid, flats are not being heated and demonstrations against him are mounting. In the east of the Ukraine, where there are 1,000,000 refugees, the popular uprising against the US-installed Fascist junta in Kiev has already raised nearly 100,000 troops, many of them defectors from Kiev’s army. All are now massing for what could become the final battle against what is left of the ragtag army sent by Kiev to massacre the Ukrainian people.

In the eastern Ukraine today banners proclaim in English ‘Yankees Go Home’ and ‘No to US Terrorism in the Donbass’. As for the European Union, it has a far greater problem to resolve. If it wants to survive, it has to decide not just if it wants total war, but also about its own future. As Cyprus offers its territory for a Russian base and Greece, Hungary and Czechia support Russia, the EU countries (not the US-appointed EU elite) have to decide if they want to be an EU/United States of Europe/US and NATO vassal colony, or a Free and Sovereign Europe of the Nations, a model put forward both by Russia and by the increasingly popular European parties of both left and right. What is happening in the Ukraine will decide the future of the whole of Europe, its life or its death.

Guest Column — Gerald Celente — America: Murder, Inc.

February 3, 2015 | Categories: Gerald Celente

Guest Column — Gerald Celente — America: Murder, Inc.

In this article Gerald Celente sums up American culture as revealed by the movie “American Sniper.” The culture of the “exceptional people” is barbaric, murderous, perverse.

Be a “Proud American.” We hate, blindly. We murder, blindly, whether on the streets of Ferguson, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Ukraine. Wherever there are people to be killed, we are there, doing the job. It is the American way.

American Sniper: A Model American
By Gerald Celente
Publisher, Trends Journal

The votes are in and the decision is overwhelmingly clear. Chris Kyle—the Navy SEAL portrayed in the blockbuster movie purported killer of some 200 Iraqis during four tours of duty—is the people’s choice.

From record ticket sales to major media accolades, from the halls of Congress to the White House, the nation has spoken: “American Sniper” is all-American. Chris Kyle—the most lethal killer in U.S. military history, a true hero, a brave warrior—has been anointed as a role model for all that America has come to stand for.

“American Sniper has the look of a bona fide cultural phenomenon!” said Brandon Griggs of CNN. And as Michelle Obama contends, “… for all those folks in America who don’t have these kinds of opportunities [to meet veterans and military families personally] films and TV are often the best way to share those stories.”

Speaking at a film industry event, Ms. Obama said the movie stressed, “The complicated moral decisions they [troops] are tasked with … the balancing of love of family with love of country.”

For Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, the essence of his “love of country” lay in obeying his commander in chief and living up to Washington’s “moral decisions.” As the movie has it, when the Twin Towers were brought down on 9/11, off to war Kyle marched. This take-no-prisoners Texan dutifully followed the orders of the tough-talking faux-Texan George W. Bush to get those “evil doers.”

Bush’s simplistic and transparently shallow bravado about bringing ‘em in “dead or alive,” a comforting scenario made plausible by nearly a century of Hollywood Westerns, once again played out perfectly in Hollywood’s “American Sniper.” In a nation where politics has become show business for ugly people, the mindset of America’s first lady made perfect sense; film and TV’s dumbed-down, glossed over, whitewashed versions of hard facts served as the perfect substitutes for harsh reality and the solid truth.

Perhaps Ms. Obama had found a soft spot in her heart for Mr. Kyle because he closely reflects the words and deeds of her husband. In his book, American Sniper, Kyle wrote that killing is “fun,” something he “loved.” In the book “DoubleDown,” authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann wrote that President Obama bragged that he’s “really good at killing people” while discussing drone strikes with his staff.

If not exactly presidential material, Kyle certainly has what it takes to be second in command. In his memoir, he wrote “We wanted people to know, we’re here and we want to mess with you … we will kill you…”

Former Vice President Dick Cheney, in his response to the recently released report on CIA torture, said he was proud of his role in creating the gruesome interrogation program that included water boarding and rectal feeding. Did he have any regrets for what he ordered? “No … absolutely not … and I’d do it again in a minute,” Cheney said.

Indeed, if Kyle were alive he would certainly be a force to be reckoned with in the 2016 race for the White House. While it would be difficult to trump Hillary Clinton’s giggling glee over the murder of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, (“We came, we saw … he died,”) in a war that she personally pushed for, Kyle’s statement that he “… couldn’t care about the Iraqis. I loved killing bad guys. … I loved what I did. I still do … it was fun,” comes very close.

The American Sniper is a model American. And the American model is immorality. George W. Bush, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Condaleeza Rice, Susan Rice, Samantha Powers … the list of perpetrators goes on. And so does the list of their crimes: slaughtering millions by waging wars based of false information, overthrowing sovereign governments based on lies, killing innocents and “suspects in drone strikes” without regard to international law and with no personal regret for their roles in fostering the mass murders. Like Chris Kyle, each of them speak proudly of their actions and express not a hint of sorrow.

Most Americans have forgotten about former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright who defended Bill Clinton’s sanctions against Iraq on a 60 Minutes segment. When the show’s host, Lesley Stahl, asked her “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean that’s more children than died in Hiroshima … is the price worth it?” Albright replied, “we think the price is worth it.”

“We,” she says, as if it truly included “us.” So speak the moralizing madmen and madwomen—sociopaths and psychopaths—who pontificate from their positions of high office, telling the rest of us what we must believe and who should be killed next.

Chris Kyle did his patriotic duty. He obeyed orders, followed the words and carried out the tasks issued from the White House. The fish rots from the head down. The American Government is the American Sniper.

Gerald Celente is the founder and director of the Trends Research Institute in Kingston, N.Y., and publisher of the Trends Journal and Trendsresearch.com.

Paris – Berlin – Saint Petersburg?

War rages in Europe. Thousands are dead. Financed by Washington and supported by its zombie media, Kiev junta troops, a ragbag of Uniats, schismatics, released criminals and foreign mercenaries, that is, all who have not fled the US-run Ukraine for freedom, deserted or dodged the draft, are surrendering and handing over yet more arms to the ever stronger freedom fighters of the Ukrainian people. Having shot down a civilian Malaysian Airlines plane and murdered everyone on board, the desperate Satanists from Kiev have been using cluster bombs against the civilian population since at least October. Such are the atrocities of the CIA-installed Neo-Nazi junta against the people of the Ukraine in their bid for freedom.

Meanwhile, in Washington itself, another ridiculous political puppet, the married ‘Patriarch of Kiev’, Filaret Denisenko, awards a medal to the Christ-hating Senator McCain and begs for arms to slaughter the Ukrainian people. Denisenkos’s heart is twisted by Ukrainian nationalist hatred and jealousy at not being elected Patriarch of the Russian Church in 1990 He pleads with the State Department to get his absurd little ‘church’ recognized by the US-run Phanar bureaucrats in Istanbul. It is not going to happen, for that would destroy the last shreds of legitimacy of the Phanar, already rejected by the vast majority of Orthodox, including those who count within its own little jurisdiction, the monks of Mt Athos.

While Kerry warmongers with the CIA junta in Kiev, Merkel and Hollande rush to Moscow to sue for peace in the Ukraine. Cameron is of course absent – as another of Washington’s warmongering puppets he will be useless in any search for peace. ‘Old Europe’, to use the contemptuous American term for those whom it could not bribe or browbeat into supporting its genocide in Iraq 12 years ago, is begging Russia to save the collapsing and bankrupt provincial Ukraine. Ironically, the situation there was the creation of the absurd EU imperialistic dream of forcing all of Europe to join the EU Fourth Reich and of the US coup d’etat in Kiev a year ago, which overthrew the legitimate democratic government.

The alternative to a peace plan agreed to at the last moment by the penitent Merkel and Hollande in conjunction with Russia (80% of the inhabitants of the Ukraine are Russian-speaking and of Russian descent) is yet more US arms and yet another US-organized bloodbath and chaos. Exactly as the US have achieved everywhere else that they have invaded in the world, from Latin America to Vietnam, from Africa to the Middle East. But practically, what interest does Russia have in the Ukraine, once the breadbasket of Europe and the most prosperous republic of the Soviet Union, in what has now become the basket case and poorest country in Europe, torn apart by a civil war? Practically, what can be done?

From the beginning, it was clear that if the artificial amalgam of the recently-invented ‘Ukraine’ – originally thought up by the Austro-Hungarian bureaucrats just over a century ago in order to divide and rule that part of their Empire, and since added to by Soviet bureaucrats for the same reason – is to survive, it must become a federal State with wide autonomy for its many different peoples and territories. However, the billionaire arms dealer Poroshenko (real name, Waltzman), whom Washington’s public relations experts set up as President of the Ukraine last year, specifically rejected this common sense solution – no doubt on orders from his US paymasters, who have no idea of history or geography.

Unless Poroshenko, who made his fortune by selling off the arms of the Ukrainian armed forces to the Third World, repents, logically there is only one solution: for the Ukraine to be dismantled, just like Europe’s other artificial conglomerates, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, and perhaps one day, the UK, Spain and Germany (the annexation of East Germany by the conglomerate of West Germany caused many of the contemporary problems in Europe, since it led directly to the foolishness of the euro). Very simply, the southern and eastern half of the ‘Ukraine’, together with the Crimea, can once more become a happy and autonomous republic in the Russian Federation, Novorossiya, as it was until the Communists annexed it.

As for parts of the south-west, they can return to Romania and Hungary; Carpatho-Russia (‘Transcarpathia’ to the imperialists and secret police in Kiev) can return to Slovakia or even Hungary, or else can become a separate republic within the Russian Federation; parts of the Uniat west, once denazified, can return to Poland; and the rump that is left can either return to being Malorossiya (Little Russia – its historical name) or else can retain the recently invented name of ‘the Ukraine’, remaining an independent through corrupt and bankrupt republic. In 25-50 years this could be absorbed into the German-run EU (if that still exists by then), or more realistically and quickly join the Eurasian Economic Union, on a par with Belarus.

One of the great ‘what ifs’ of history is what would have happened if the Paris-Berlin-Saint Petersburg axis had not been broken in 1914. Surely then, the nations of Europe would have resisted the masonic plot to set it at war and destroy its monarchies, which some believe to have been directed by certain forces in London. Of course, it was not to be, and Berlin, gripped by power lust, launched its Great War. Could Berlin today, run by one from East Germany where President Putin from Saint Petersburg also once lived, and supported by its French colony, not be able to act independently from Washington (which today plays the role that London played in 1914) and broker peace in the troubled Ukrainian provinces?

If Europe could act together as Europe, scrapping the imperialist US Cold War creations of the EU and NATO, it could unite in a real Community of Sovereign Nations, including the Russian Federation. A Community of Nations from the Pacific to the Atlantic, a united Eurasian Economic Union, could become reality. The Fascist bribery and euro, imposed from Brussels, could cease. The UK could be saved from its status as a neocon vassal in Europe. Many nations, from Catalonia to Wallonia and Scotland could at last be freed from centralization. However, none of this is possible if the German and French leaders continue to reject the Christian roots of Europe and wander in the lost paths of atheism, just as they did in 1914.

Sad News and Hopeful News

The Eurozone is bankrupt, so much so that it now has to go to the inflationary last resort of printing a trillion euros (a process known by the euphemism of ‘quantitative easing’), just like the bankrupted US and the UK before it. And yet many colonized countries in the feudal Eurozone, like France, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland, have already been ravaged by the debt caused by printing money before, debt which they will never pay off. Much of the eastern and southern Eurozone, although much less in debt than the US and the UK which will never pay off their debt either, has become a region of inevitable emigration for the young. It has reverted to poverty beneath the austerity programmes imposed on it by Berlin, which is at the top of the feudal Fourth Reich pyramid in Europe.

In countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland especially, young people are being forced to flee abroad to seek work as wage-slaves doing jobs that local people no longer want to do. Then their governments can declare that ‘unemployment is falling’ (only because the population is falling) and the young in question can send money home to their elderly parents, thus propping up the governments. In France, governed by a supposedly Socialist regime, almost every day they pick up the frozen corpses of those who died in the streets the night before (15,000 last winter). Even in the apparently prospering UK, as in the US, tens of thousands of people are living off foodbanks in a situation unthinkable only a few years ago.

Meanwhile, in the luxury resort of Davos, outside the ravaged Eurozone, it is said that 1700 private jets have flown in many of the world’s billionaires, including the arms-dealer Poroshenko, to talk about the state of the world. Elsewhere in Europe a war between the US-financed separatist Galician junta and the Ukrainian people rages. Thousands are already dead. American arms are found by the liberators of the Ukrainian people at Donetsk Airport. Ukrainian children are dying in bombardments at the hands of that neo-Nazi puppet Poroshenko and other murderous and anti-Christian oligarchs, most of them based abroad. They are keenly supported by the grandchildren of US and Canadian Galician Nazis who guarded Auschwitz, liberated 70 years ago by heroic Russians, Ukrainians and Belarussians.

The US has launched anti-Russian economic sanctions and a currency war, a declaration of economic war, against Russia because the people of the Crimea massively and democratically voted to join Russia. Now, at US behest, Saudi Arabia is pumping so much oil that the oil price has fallen by over half in the last few months. The objective is to bankrupt oil-rich countries perceived by wealthy neocons in Washington as enemies – countries like Russia, but also Venezuela and Iran. The objective behind this is ‘regime-change’ – manipulating and setting up pro-Washington puppet regimes in those countries, whose natural resources can then be stripped, or, if not, simply creating chaos and mayhem in them, as has so successfully been done in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, the Yemen, the Sudan, Nigeria etc.

The first problem with all this is that both US-imposed sanctions and cheapened oil are more likely to bankrupt EU vassal states and even US oil corporations first. The second problem is that the US elite seems to have learned nothing from the fate of the puppet governments in the banana republics it has always created in Latin America, as well as in South Vietnam fifty years ago and in Iraq and Afghanistan ten years ago. It has forgotten that as one corrupt oligarch after another fell there, Washington had to send ever more of its young men to kill and then die there in the name of ‘freedom and democracy’, but in reality all for nothing. The result of it all is that a now bankrupt (by $17 trillion) USA is reducing itself to becoming no more than a regional power, with an economy already second to that of China.

The First World War, whose inglorious centenaries of the slaughter of the youth of Europe are being so noisily remembered just now, is commonly considered a war of futile deaths. And yet what could be more futile than the deaths of the millions of men, women and children who are dying today at the hands of pseudo-Muslim psychopaths and criminals, trained, armed and financed by the anti-Muslim West, its secret agencies and its allies? Has the West not understood that the terrorism of the pseudo-Muslim fanatics it has created in Syria and elsewhere will rebound on it again and again? In the globalized world that the West has created, it is no longer insulated from its own crimes. The secularist and atheist West has made its own worst enemies and dug its own grave for itself in its self-imposed old age.

Fortunately, outside the insular-minded West, healthy forces are gathering, not just in Russia, but in Iran, China, India, Brazil, in several Muslim countries including Turkey, as well as on the disillusioned fringes of the EU and Europe itself, in Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, Greece, Serbia, Moldova, Armenia and Georgia. And those forces are all saying the same thing – enough. Thus, ignored by the enslaved Western media which has no free speech, in the Chechen capital Grozny, 800,000 Muslims and Russian Orthodox Christians march hand in hand against the Western blasphemies of spoilt infantiles. Here is hope for the future, that spiritually healthy forces worldwide will yet unite against the Great Western Apostasy, which Satan has so cunningly prepared these last thousand years. All is not yet lost.

Woe unto You

Pope Francis has visited Turkey. This is surprising; Turkey is a country where historically he has never had a flock or any jurisdiction. Since he did not go there in order to visit the handful of Catholic diplomats and foreigners who do live there, his visit was clearly politically and not spiritually motivated. Despite the pious spin put on the visit by his PR advisors and parroted by the subservient, ethnocentric Western media, we can guess what may really have been behind it.

Since the Pope’s recent visit to the Strasbourg ‘Parliament’ of the Eurokommisar puppets and his recent contacts with US politicians, we suspect that that his visit was organized by his American masters. Otherwise he would have gone to Ferguson, where there are real, resident Catholics and the services of a pastor are more urgently needed. We believe that the Papal visit to Turkey had two aims:

1. To help ensure that the Turkish government, in the past pro-EU and pro-US, does not fall to Islamism. This seems possible given its imperialistic support for anti-Syrian terrorism and now its refusal to attack Islamic State.

2. To negotiate the further Uniatization of the Greek Orthodox remnants in Istanbul for their absorption into the Vatican meat-grinder.

This second aim is indicated by last week’s visit to the Greek Orthodox Patriarch in Istanbul by Joe Biden, who gave his instructions for the Papal visit. For despite the canons of the Orthodox Church which forbid political appointees, since 1948 the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Istanbul has been run by Washington.

Here the world’s powerbrokers are barking up the wrong tree. Patriarch Bartholomew is not ‘the spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians’, as reported by the ignorant Western media. In reality, there are 215 million Orthodox Christians, 164 million of them in the Russian Orthodox Church, and Patriarch Bartholomew is only the much-contested representative of a small minority of 3 million Greek Orthodox, essentially outside Greece and Cyprus, mainly in the USA.

Despite the fantasies of the apparently uneducated mandarins of the US State Department, who imagine Patriarch Bartholomew as a political pawn able to snatch the Ukrainian Orthodox Church from the multinational Russian Church, so helping to undermine Her, the tiny Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul is largely irrelevant in today’s world and has been since 1453.

As for the first aim, the Pope’s visit has surely done more harm than good. The Pope spoke against Islamist violence (which has in part been carried out by thousands of European-born Muslims and has largely been financed by US allies, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. We too utterly condemn all violence, including Islamist. And that is why we, unlike the Pope, also utterly condemn Western violence. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya never invaded the West. The West invaded them and slaughtered hundreds of thousands, if not millions. In Iraq’s case, the West invaded twice and is now meddling there for the third time. This is the same hypocrisy as in the Crimea. For the West also invaded the Crimea twice, once in 1854, urged on by the then Pope, again in 1941, and then tried to meddle there in 2014, planning to set up a NATO base in Sebastopol with which to threaten Russia.

The Pope’s speech is all the stranger since he is the representative of the very organization which slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Muslims (and Orthodox Christians) in the blood-soaked Crusades. In other words, the Pope represents the grandfather of Western violence against Muslims (and also against the Orthodox Church). We can therefore think of no-one less appropriate to call on Islamists to cease their violence than this ‘ecumenical’ Pope, who during his visit honoured Kemal Ataturk – responsible in part for the deaths of some two million Greek and Armenian Christians.

Only when Western and Western-supplied bombs, shells and bullets have stopped tearing apart the bodies of innocent Muslim men, women and children all over the Middle East, will fanatical Islamists stop slaughtering Non-Islamists in revenge. ‘Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity (Matt. 23, 27-28).