All Episodes
Previous Next
March 3, 2022 - The Delingpod - James Delingpole
01:12:03
Alex Thomson
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
- Welcome to the DellingPod with me, James DellingPod.
And I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I really am.
Back on the show is Alex Thompson.
Alex, I'm so glad you could do this.
I've been wanting to have you back for ages.
How do we... I've forgotten how we introduced you last time.
I mean, I think most people know who you are, but just tell us who you are.
Well, most people know me now as the regular Wednesday correspondent on UK Column News, which is directly available from ukcolumn.org, and they may have seen me also from various guest appearances on other channels.
Sometimes I'm searched for as Alex Thompson GCHQ because the most notorious thing about me is that I used to work for that British intelligence agency, although I did leave 13 years ago now and I never tried to pass off my insights as current, But there we go, that's the background to me.
Ex-establishment insider, spook, now turned intellectual dissident and commentator on both Western and Eastern Europe, because I used to live and work, and still do in fact work, for Eastern Europe in many ways, now as a Bible translator.
Good.
I've got the right man, I think, to talk about the things we're going to talk about.
I mean, actually, there's loads of stuff we could talk about.
I wanted to talk to you in a future podcast about my Psalm learning and about my... I've almost nailed Proverbs 3, you were pleased to hear.
Jolly good.
Is the Lord teaching your hands to war, then?
Oh, totally!
Actually, funnily enough, since you mentioned that...
I have a cold shower every morning, and I stay in the cold shower for as long as it takes to say, blessed be the Lord my strength, which teaches my hands to warm and my fingers to fight, you know, right to the end.
I don't know how, I haven't timed it, but it seems to be a reasonable amount to be freezing my arse off.
Some of the Highlanders who settled in the Canadian provinces used to do that to measure out the land they were given.
They would say, it's three Psalm 23s to get to the edge of my property from this tree.
That is the most interesting, weird fact I'm likely to hear all this month.
Maybe even all this year.
That's a really good one.
Thank you for that.
Now, Alex, we've got to cut to the chase here.
I organised this extra special edition podcast because I wanted to be topical.
Now, tell me if I'm doing it right.
I've learnt to re-pronounce Kiev, Kaif.
I've got this sort of solid... You're nearly right.
There are people Tell me.
There are people saying Kyiv, Kyiv, but it's actually, in Ukrainian, it's Kyiv.
Kyiv.
Kyiv.
You're nearly there.
Kyiv.
Kyiv.
It's Kyiv.
The first syllable is Ky and the second is Yv.
So Kyiv.
Kyiv.
Kyiv.
How similar is Ukrainian to Russian?
If you want a linguist's technical answer, it is morphologically rather identical and lexically less identical, and syntactically somewhere in the middle.
It's one of the three Eastern Slavic languages, the third being Byelorussian, alongside the much better-known Russian.
So they're mutually intelligible to a large degree.
That's what I wanted to know.
Right, I see.
And what else are you doing?
I interrupted rudely.
I've paid several thousand pounds to have a sonne lumiere installed in my house so that it's now illuminated by blue and yellow light.
I've encouraged my sons to enlist in the Ukrainian Air Force so that they can emulate the ghost of Kyiv.
How do you say it again?
The ghost of Kyiv?
The Ghost of Kiev, who according to Off-Guardian is one of the seven fake news stories coming out of the Ukraine.
Don't say it's fake news, Alex, because I got very excited.
He was flying a MiG-29, I think, which is what?
What's that?
Is that Flogger?
I think that's what they were claiming.
What's the name of that?
Oh, isn't it Foxbat?
Is it a Foxbat?
No, Fencer was before Foxbat.
I used to know all these off-pack when I was in the queue, but yeah, Fencer I would imagine then.
Someone's got to shoot me down in the comments, but I think it's Fencer.
But basically, apparently, this guy was the first ace of the 21st century.
Apparently, if he'd actually existed and if he'd done the things that were attributed to him, he would indeed have been the first fighter ace.
I'm not even sure.
You know what?
I used to be hot for this kind of thing.
I remember that.
Do you remember that film where Clint Eastwood, I think it was, had to take over a a fox bat and and which would use your thoughts or something it was the most advanced technology but i think a bit like tanks have been rendered obsolete by drones i think in the same way fighters just you're not going to get dogfights anymore are you where people become fighter races in the space of a day you get these sort of double uh helix arrangements where where technologies spiral around each other in
In fact, Carol Quigley wrote about this, that the government and the people that sometimes are equally matched and at other times the government can outgun the people.
Same with these fighter jet and tank technologies.
It's not for nothing that the gentlemen's agreement we had with the Germans was these are the two things you won't build in your own right because you would beat us at doing so, you know.
So there are Arguments now, not that I'm a specialist in military hardware, but there seem to be arguments from both West and East that tanks and fighter jets are now the way to go again, because of the new generation of stuff that they've got on them.
I'm clearly very far behind.
Anyway, so I've got my sons enlisting in the Ukrainian Air Force, I've got my pronunciation, well, pretty shoddy, but almost right, and Yeah, am I doing it right?
Am I... oh, and sorry, I forgot to mention, I've changed my name by deed poll to James I Stand With Ukraine Dealing Poll.
Have I done enough?
You've done enough to satisfy Liz Truss, who is retweeting Volodymyr Zelensky's tweets now with 14-year-old hero pointy finger.
You're satisfying her.
And if you would like to sacrifice one of your sons over the Ukrainian skies, I'm sure she'll be pleased as punch.
How that sits with her requirements under international law, as a minister of Her Majesty's Government, I'm not sure.
Even more so on the continent, where you can prosecute ministers for this kind of warmongering much more easily than in Britain.
But they're all saying, send your sons on an individual basis to volunteer for the Ukrainians.
But if they end up fighting for the Russians, that's probably a different kettle of fish, as far as NATO's concerned.
Equally unlawful to encourage either, but never mind.
I would have thought.
So, I'll tell you what's bothering me about this, and it's this.
About this time last week, more or less, the papers were full of stories about Covid, and about masks, and about the ongoing importance of taking these experimental vaccines, and
I look in the papers now, and all I see is Kyiv, Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine, Putin is evil, Putin is threatening nuclear war.
It seems to have bumped this coronavirus, which has been dominating the news for the last two years, completely out of the papers.
What's going on?
How far back in time do you want to go, James?
We could talk about Ukrainian history for a couple of minutes.
Go on.
Or we could talk about the script.
Tell me a bit about Ukrainian history first.
All right.
You have this people, the Eastern Slavs.
They live in the woods.
The Vikings come along, and because they're on a River Crossing, going all the way down from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, and hence to the riches of the Orient, they found a state which is Norse for the first couple of generations, right?
So they found this state and they call it Rus, and its first capital is Kyiv, or Kiev if you prefer.
Then, after a few centuries of glory and conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy and various other things, the Mongol horde washes up and they know where Kiev is.
So they keep sacking it.
Hence, some of the likelier lads among the prince, the princely set in Rus, move off north and east into woods that the Mongols haven't yet discovered.
And they found cities like Vladimir and later Moscow, quite near Vladimir.
Hence, you get the second foundation of a capital of the state of Rus.
Kiev and its wonderfully fertile lands, bear in mind this is all the same people, the Eastern Slavs, eventually loses its statehood and this state is clustered around what's now central Ukraine.
There are chaps who flee south to be free men, that's what Cossack means, and they form these Cossack bands in the marshes around the Black Sea coast, lying low away from this Turkic and Mongol horde.
And that's how things go on until Poland, in a union with Lithuania, becomes a very mighty commonwealth and, in the 17th century, takes all this land and almost puts an end to Russian statehood, you know, the the Muscovite Russian state.
Not quite.
Then, after the time of troubles, the Russians turn bit by bit into a great empire.
That is the bare bones of what's happened, and all of what I was saying about Kiev and Rus, or Kiev, or the Eastern Slavs living around Kiev, is referring to a territory that is still the northern two-thirds and the western two-thirds of what's now on the map Ukraine.
The southern flank along the Black Sea and the eastern flank wasn't part of a state called Ukraine.
Until the late 18th century, Catherine the Great, and it was called Novorossiya, New Russia, and for those who think, oh dear, this is expansionist, it was called that because the main city in that territory was called Novorossiysk, not because the Russians were saying this is where we're moving to.
There are other details as well, such as that in the Tsarist era, they called Russia proper Great Russia, And this sounds very jingoistic, and they called Ukraine Little Russia, but that's a bit like, if you remember at school, Magna Graecia, the Greek colonists.
All it means to say is that Rus started in the Ukraine, and then there is a Greater Russia, i.e.
a Diaspora Russia, further to the east, in the backwoods, lying low from the Turks and the Tatars.
That's all it means.
So that's a fairly even-handed view of what went on up to the Soviet period, but it's the Soviet period that really does the business.
So, well, I've given you enough of a prior history lesson.
We might dive into modern history in a moment, the Bolshevik period and the City of London pulling the strings through Manhattan.
I think you should.
Yes, go on.
Take me on.
Very well, right.
I won't repeat here anything that I have said in my recent testimony for day two of the Grand Jury, that's grand-jury.net, led by Rainer Fumich.
That's quite recent, and in the middle of that I spoke a little about How it is that analysts of my persuasion and serious historians like Anthony Sutton and Patrick Wood say, look, the city and Manhattan were in charge of the world's 20th century dictatorships, particularly the Germans and Russian ones.
That's that I'll take as a given here.
I spoke a couple of I gave a couple of examples there about how Nazism was funded from the city of London and Wall Street.
But Anthony Sutton also wrote books about how this was true of Bolsheviks from the beginning.
Now, it's not just him.
The Soviet ambassador to London in the crucial 1930s, Ivan Maisky, wrote a hard-to-get book, at least in German translation, it's called Wer half Hitler?
Who helped Hitler?
And he gives a fairly comprehensive view there of seeing in the 1930s that certain bloodlines in the city of London and dominating events through forums like the Lord Mayor's Banquet that he talks about and the Foreign Office and the think tanks, Families like the Somersets and the Astors are dead set on wiping the Soviet Union off the map under Lenin.
However, they do still want to have a dictatorship there.
It's just they would rather have a bloc that's favorable to them.
They don't care, and this will make more sense if people read, listen to my day two filming testimony, they don't care whether Germany is at war with Russia most of the time, they don't even care if one of them attacks the Anglo-American bloc, because the thinking is we're the sea power, we can still encircle them both.
What they don't want is the development of independent, freedom-loving, and certainly small states in that part of the world.
Now, there's got to be a German-dominated bloc and a Russian-dominated bloc.
And that, in a nutshell, is why the Ukrainians suffered, right, horrendously with the Holodomor, as I'm sure you know, because they were told, you are going into the Soviet bloc.
And Her Majesty's government, at the top level, the bloodline and City of London level, wanted them to be in that bloc.
And therefore their Soviet stooges kept doing them the disfavor, killing them softly, of putting bits of other people's territory into their territory.
Putin was saying this back in 2015.
It wasn't just for the first time last week when he recognized the Donetsk Republics that he said this.
He said, Romanian land, Hungarian land, I visited it in the far west of Ukraine, around Ungvar or Ushuorod as it is now, a lot of Russian land, Crimea and the Donbass, was given.
To the Ukrainian state, which had never been in the Ukrainian state.
And, you know, more generally, I don't want to get too convoluted here, but this is the point that people who are more minded about international law and the West must keep territorial integrity, they've got to bear this in mind.
There were two or three layers of states within the Soviet Union.
There was the Soviet Union, the sovereign.
There was the republics, and there were autonomous republics within them.
And each layer of those, so in the case of Georgia, that would be Abkhazia, South Ossetia.
In the case of Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, it's Nagorno-Karabakh.
In the case of Ukraine, you've got certainly the Crimea falls into this category.
They have an equal claim, as does the Ukrainian level of statehood, of saying we're out of here, we don't want to be part of a state called Ukraine.
It's not as simple as saying the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, ANO 1991, has to be maintained.
That, in a nutshell, is the Russians' legal contention here.
Right.
This is, I mean, clear as mud to me.
It's so complicated, but let's just simplify it a little.
You're suggesting that actually Putin is not wholly out of order in his belief that he has a right, a territorial right to Ukraine.
Let's say that the Russian state, particularly the most well-educated branch of the Russian state, the diplomatic service, the foreign ministry with, of course, Lavrov and Maria Zakharova as spokesmen.
The point that they're making, as always, is that they are sticklers for the treaties, for international law.
The last phase of this Ukraine-Russia conflict is since 2014, since the coup, the Maidan, which apparently in the West we're supposed to call the revolution of dignity that brought the Soros NGOs into the country.
If we just start there as the sort of the proximate phase of this war, the proximate cause, through all of that period there were diplomatic instruments in place, the Minsk Accords, with France and Germany as external guarantors, and the Ukrainians as a government never stuck to them.
They're now saying, well, we signed under duress.
They haven't formally invoked the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, but they're hinting that articles, I think it's 41 and so, and following of those apply, that look, we signed because our arm was being twisted.
We had no intention of ever talking to those Donetsk and Lugansk republics and coming to a federal solution within Ukraine.
But that's the Russians' contention, that these guys have not honoured their agreement and they've filled their government with neo-Nazi parties.
And when the Russians say that, they're not just bandying stuff around.
You know, the far west of Ukraine, and even in the majority of ethnic Ukraine, they do say the far west are nutters.
They really are.
If they hear someone speaking Russian, they curse them in many cases.
They're wacko.
And I've been in that area.
There's some lovely people, but they're led by a completely Weird Banderist agenda in many cases.
That western part of the country is determined not to see any Russian influence.
Right.
So there's several nations within the ethnic Ukrainian nation.
I know it all sounds complicated, but, you know, there's seven or eight zones in Ukraine, and about four of them are historic Ukraine, but they all, even they want different things.
Right.
And they consider some of the finest people on the face of the planet, don't get me wrong, and I consider them in many ways More civilised than us, having travelled a lot among them for 20, 25 years and seen their progress.
But they have been put up to neo-Nazism and the Russians are quite right to point this out.
You know, there's this, the best known example is the Azov Battalion.
More generally, the cluster of most of the Nutter neo-Nazis is called the Right Sector, Pravi Sektor.
They've even thrown out a couple of brigades like the White Hammer Brigade.
One of the ones that's still in that cluster is called Trisub or the Trident Militia, and the guy who leads that was late last year appointed the advisor to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, while Britain and other NATO countries are training, equipping, and arming.
The Ukrainian Ministry of Defence.
So we have been putting guns into the hands of Nazis.
Putin is not exaggerating there.
Where does this Nazi strand come from?
Right.
Well, conventionally, people would say, ah, well, you see, the Far West, which I just outlined, was always, you know, very far out.
Ukraine nationalists removed the Russians kind of zone because they weren't historically ever in Russia.
They were Austro-Hungarian and Polish.
Most people will say, well, the legacy of the chief Ukrainian wartime Nazi collaborator, Stepan Bandera, lives on there.
And in fact, that Trident battalion I just mentioned, Trident Militia Preserve, its full name is in honor of Stepan Bandera, right?
So it's in honor of a Nazi collaborator.
Most commentators will say, well, it's just a, you know, you have to give them a bit of leeway.
It's a bit like the, you know, the Estonians and the Latvians.
They honour their SS collaborator past because they had even worse things happen to them by the Soviets, which is to a large extent true.
But no, it goes further than that.
These people have a seat in government.
They're at a national level, although they have very minority support, to my mind, in Ukraine.
They don't get many seats in Parliament, if any, most of these far-right groupings that are united in the right sector.
Nevertheless, because of the weak statehood and eternal corruption, the more so since Soros took over the anti-corruption drive to make sure everything was in his hand the last eight years, they have not been able to stop
In a very fine and upstanding and Christian and civilized nation, they've not been able to stop a successive stream of absolute nutters and skull crushers and, in many cases, Jew hunters and Russian burners from having a seat in government or being part of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense at an unofficial level.
They haven't been able to tease out the state troops from their militias.
And this isn't very much to NATO's liking.
That's the heart of Russia's beef.
And OK, there has been shelling of Ukrainians in Ukrainian-controlled territory for eight years.
Let's not be silent about that.
But what the West's media has deliberately silenced is that for eight years, those nutters, often embedded in and in the uniform of the Ukrainian MoD, have been shelling the Donbass Republics, killing many women and children day and night.
Yeah, yeah.
What do we know about... I've seen reports of atrocities committed by the Ukrainians against the Russian-speaking population.
I mean, is this real or is this Putin propaganda?
It is so difficult, James, to see what videos are genuine.
I've got very good contacts in and around Ukraine.
Who are very conscientious about finding sourced video footage.
And yet, they have to say sometimes, sorry, no, this turned out to be something other than what it was.
A lot of the footage is horrible stuff of young men's frazzled corpses after being bombarded in the convoy on the road in their APCs.
And sometimes the claim is, oh, this is Ukrainian convoy bombed by the Russians, and then two hours later, you hear, no, other way around.
And then you sit here, no, it was a propaganda staging exercise.
And these were clacked out old APCs anyway, that were just meat on sen.
It's impossible to find out the truth of much of it.
The contours are clear that the Russians have modernized their forces tremendously, including their ground forces, nevermind their superweapons, which is another factor to ward off NATO.
And certainly since Shoigu became Defense Minister, he's deliberately, he's told the Americans one-to-one, hands off or I'll liquidate NATO's or nullify the force of NATO's ground forces if you come in.
That's one thing, but it's certain that since the Russian troops, many of them led by paras as shock troops, but now with the tanks catching up, whenever they get into a sizable Ukrainian city, they are holding off longer than many analysts thought they would.
Because there is a massive determination by, I have to say, very manly and patriotic Ukrainians.
They're one of the best nations on earth in that regard.
And many young women as well are taking up arms.
A massive determination to resist.
And I'm not going to say that all of these people by any means are nutters.
There are some nutters driving around who are shooting on sight anyone who's out after curfew and accusing them of being a Russian fifth column.
But they have a point because there is a genuine Russian fifth column within those Ukrainian cities, that is, it seems to have been tasked by the Russian MOD with doing the dirty work of rounding up the neo-Nazis so that ultimately Russian could put them on trial for war crimes somewhere outside the main international justice system.
Right.
Just tell me briefly about the 2014 coup.
Am I right in thinking it was orchestrated by NATO, the EU and the US State Department, or at least the deep state branch thereof?
Most certainly.
Victoria Newland, that creature at the Foreign Office, and the wife of Robert Kaplan and Neocon in his own right, as you know, was famously phone-tapped in late 2014, beginning of 2015 when all this happened, saying, our man is YATS, that's Yatsenyuk, an extremist, he's going to be Prime Minister, the EU doesn't want him, but F the EU.
And Newland, as late as last October, October 2021, was in the Kremlin, and this is in mainstream sources, saying Putin has got to resign or we're going to choke you off financially.
We being the protection racket that sometimes calls itself the US, sometimes NATO, and ultimately is the City of London Bloodlines.
That's what all this is about, containing Russia, as it was at the end of the Second World War.
An amoral strategy of saying, well, we want a block in the world, but not too powerful.
You're not supposed to take over Western Europe.
We need two blocks there, because if you unite into one, Eurasia, we're finished.
Our domination of the world is finished.
Right.
That's the big picture of this, and has been throughout the 20th century.
Right.
So, by our, you mean you're being America there?
Or are you talking about the kind of Anglosphere alliance?
What the Russian sources now openly call, if you read RIA Novosti, the Kremlin-aligned media now, they're openly calling Anglo-Saxon domination of Europe.
They're openly saying it's time for the Germans and French to have their own project of European financial and military unification, thereby blowing the gaff on something that the real bloodline characters like, in an American version, W. Averell Harriman, openly said when he was talking to the Truman Library in retirement in an interview.
He said, when we were running the post-war Marshall Plan, Quote, our whole concept of the unification of Europe was that it would first contribute to economic unification, then we hoped to secure an economic military unity, and finally a political unity.
So in short, and UK columnists reported on many strands of this for years, the we there is Anglo-American ascendancy.
Right.
Telling the Johnny Continental, you will jolly well unite and have one bank and one armed forces that we will be supplying.
But the other block will be the Russians.
It's Orwell.
But the perspective, of course, is London and Washington, or the financial centres there, telling the London and Washington politicians what to do.
There will be two blocs, neither of them will get too weak or too strong.
If you've seen that, you've understood the 20th century, in almost all its vicissitudes.
Yes.
So, most people Including all the people who are now hot for war with Russia and who believe everything they read in the newspapers.
They see this conflict purely in terms of Putin is like the new Hitler and the goodies who are America and the UK and their various allies are simply trying to keep...
Protect a sovereign state because of evil Putin's expansionist ambitions to sort of recreate the Soviet Union.
I mean, that's roughly the level of understanding, isn't it, from most normal people, ordinary people?
But what you're suggesting... It is, and like most lies, it's a lie by omission.
and the omission is?
The omission is that it's not done and dusted that the state in question, Ukraine this time, Georgia in 2008, the country on which I was the acknowledged British intelligence expert, that the country on which I was the acknowledged British intelligence expert, that the Americans sometimes asked for a lead I was Mr. Georgia for the Anglo-Saxon ascendancy in the intelligence bloc.
The lie is that these states, as they came into existence at the beginning of the Soviet period, and in the case of Ukraine, as they grew and gained territory at the expense of other Russian-dominated territories during the Soviet Union, these countries don't end the period in 1991 with an indisputable claim to have full
Jurisdiction, and particularly not as a unitary state, a centrally governed state, over these areas where well before Sovietization these people already had some form of self-determination, sometimes formal republics, and in some cases already, like the Ossetians in Georgia, already had suffered genocide at the beginning of the Soviet period.
from the in this case the Georgians and in the less of a case with the Ukraine but that's what they feared.
So you're ticking all the boxes there for a fair-minded judge at the Hague at the ICJ to say well these people have got a well-trodden path to statehood that meets all the jurisprudence and treaties of international law.
That's the bit that's being omitted.
Right.
We sort of, I mean I used to think this as well, we used to think that the American government used to represent the interests of the American people and that the British government represented the interests of the British people and that MI5 and MI6 were working for us to protect us.
But what you seem to be suggesting is that actually there is a kind of, there is a level above governments, a level outside the system that we sort of, we've been encouraged to respect and trust, which is scheming for we've been encouraged to respect and trust, which is scheming for its own interests and against the interests of the American people and the British
And that these essentially are the people who have been, and they did it before with the Bolshevik Revolution, they did it before the Second World War, and they did it before with every war pretty much since at least the French Revolution.
These people, I don't know what you want to call them, the powers that be or whatever, have So, he engineered a coup in Ukraine in 2014, replacing a democratic... Was he democratically elected?
Who was the Ukrainian president?
Yes.
Yanukovych, who's back in Ukraine now, was very much democratically elected.
And his party, the Party of the Regions, had very widespread support in that belt of eastern and southern Ukraine, where it's majority Russian speakers, and non-negligible support in the central and western parts, where there are Russian speakers too.
There are people who say... He was certainly democratically elected.
They say it was... And if I can just finish that, the point was, in that winter 2013-2014, and the best commentators in this, as usual, are not in English, but people like Thomas Roeper writing in German, But it's publicly available information if anyone wants to pull it together.
Yanukovych was being enticed by an EU-Ukraine association agreement, a precursor to full EU and ultimately NATO membership.
The Dutch were constitutionally required to have a citizens' referendum and, inconveniently, the Dutch said no and the Dutch government, led by the cabals, said, no, we'll set that aside and ultimately outlawed referenda in future because that one went the wrong way.
Right, that happened.
And then the rest of that winter, Yanukovych's last winter as the democratically elected government president of Ukraine, he approached the Russians and said, well, I see that you're about to have sound money and a good trading system and a less bullying world order.
Let us integrate with your bloc.
And at that point we struck.
Our bloodline struck.
Because this again, if you take the very bird's eye view, was tipping the balance towards what Stalin was threatening to do in the post-Second World War period, that there would be one bloc.
Lead by Russia.
We can't have that.
We've got to have two mostly at each other's throats.
One led by Russia and one led by Berlin slash Brussels.
Right.
There'll be lines of control running from both of those to the city in Manhattan, but we can't have one.
And presumably Putin's paranoia, justifiable, I think we can agree, was hardly helped by the attempted colour revolution in Belarus.
Tell me about that.
Yes, well, this has always been the Western cartels final plan is to bring colour revolutions, not just to the satellites of Russia and China and Iran, but to those countries themselves.
And, you know, Belarus is extremely comparable to Russia in that its population is very largely Russian-speaking and many of them don't have a strong Belarusian national identity.
The trouble is that many in the West, especially on our side of the COVID question, have thought that because Lukashenko talked the talk, he must be a hero for standing up to the World Health Organization.
He is a horrendous dictator who did unspeakable things to female protesters in prison, who sent the KGB around to do shoot-em-ups.
We've shown some of that footage in extra time on the UK column for our subscribers.
It's gory, ghastly footage.
The Byelorussians had absolutely had enough, but they were, as with the Ukrainians in a different way, caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.
They, like all of these, shall I dare say, more advanced, in the best sense, more Western-looking, more civilized countries in the West and South of the Soviet sphere, so Georgia and Ukraine and Estonia lead the pack, they've been caught between this, you know, Grudging acceptance that the Brits and Americans are keeping nutters alive in their government and with revanchist ideas towards Russia.
And on the other hand, they absolutely don't want to be, and certainly not the Belarusians too, because they're very civilized and peaceful people.
They don't want to be dominated by a Putin-led government.
I've got to be frank about that.
It's a retrograde step for them.
There will be no toleration, for example, of the thriving Protestant, particularly Baptist, minority that's had a hundred years of existence or more in Ukraine and Georgia.
If a Putinist state takes over in Ukraine and Georgia fully, they will go completely backwards.
At the moment, for example, they had an interim president, Oleksandr Turchinov in Ukraine, who was a member of the Evangelical Baptist Church.
I'm not suggesting he did a stellar job, but, you know, this is the level of development they've got to.
More freedom and better quality of life in many ways, as I've been seeing again recently last year with my visits in both the Russian and pro-Russian and pro-EU zone of Ukraine.
Better living and better liberties than we have.
And to go from that to being dominated by Putin, simply because of the global chessboard?
Yes.
Not something that they want.
This explains why they're genuinely taking up arms.
Yes, I see that.
No, I think I'm really enjoying your nuanced perspective because it's not what we're seeing at all in the media at the moment.
Tell me, Why, how does it work?
Do the papers, have they got sort of embeds from the intelligence services who are effectively telling them how to report things?
Because it's really odd that, you know, you look at the Look at the print press, for example.
On the front page, you've got photographs like the woman, presumably a crisis actor, I suspect, with her face sort of picturesquely adorned with blood.
The bandage around her head and she sort of looks, you know, like you feel sorry for her.
And again, you've got the pictures of model pretty girls in combat uniforms in the trenches, allegedly waiting to repel the Russian assault and so on.
All this emotive stuff, just consistent throughout the newspapers.
Who is directing this?
How does it work?
If people go to the foot of our homepage, ukcolumn.org, one of the articles that we've pinned there, written around the time of that 2014 Ukraine coup, My Danku, by Brian Gerrish, is called BBC Media Action Subversion from... Kazakhstan is mentioned in the title of the article anyway.
From Broadcasting House to Kazakhstan, I think it said, is the title.
And Kazakhstan, and now Ukraine and Georgia, have had this very much, that the BBC's so-called charity, and I'm not saying that they take all the blame, but a substantial proportion of it, and the same is true of other Western monopoly broadcasters, state-aligned broadcasters, they send trainers in.
To get people who are native journalists in those countries to assume the globalist perspective.
They act as stringers for the big names that come in, the Orlegarians and the Lise Doucets.
To take those two ladies of vast experience, it would be silly to call them puppets or script readers.
They are women with a formed worldview and nuanced understanding.
Not one that I agree with, obviously, but they're not lying every day, consciously.
They have a certain worldview, they report what's told them, and they themselves don't seem to be fully aware that when they stand up with their helmets and flak jackets on saying we're getting reports that, that what's being written for them is a script by, well for short shall we say, the BBC's and MI6's locally trained stringers.
And I saw the MI6 side of this, the Christopher Steele, the head of the Russia desk.
I saw him steering the Ukrainian SBU, which, by the way, is a tyrannical intelligence service domestically, like a lot of the intelligence services in the region, especially once the Brits and Americans get their mitts on them.
I've seen this happening, that what happened that allows, and it even allowed, you know, the Russia gate and the Trump angle, is that it allows the churning out of stuff which is local.
It's in Cyrillic, or it looks like it comes from the region, and it says Putin bad man.
Right, that stuff can then be used in Western capitals to swing Western opinion.
Right, I get that, but there's more to it than that.
I mean, okay, the BBC is influential, but we're talking about the Mail, the Telegraph, all the papers, the Sun, they're all hot for war, and they've all got kind of neo-con columnists whose names we won't mention, who are ready at the moment's notice to write up these pieces about how Putin is a crazed dictator, how The people of the Ukraine are just stunning and brave and so on.
It's just relentless.
There is not a mainstream paper which is dissenting from any of this narrative.
I mean, I don't think you'd even find space for an article as nuanced as your commentary has been today in any of the papers.
So where's it coming from?
How come this total unanimity?
I think the key aspect there is that very few of them speak Russian or Ukrainian.
They are going on translated material, and the same is true among the truthers.
What's being shared on Telegram in many cases is, okay, in most cases accurately translated or subtitled stuff from Russian and Ukrainian, but that means that even the free media, the new media, is depending on a very few people.
to be telling the scrupulous truth about what's happening on the ground from day to day.
And I'm afraid this has spread to the FCO and even the intelligence agencies.
The quality and quantity of Russianists and speakers of the other languages in that region was going down in my time and it's now hit rock bottom.
The Foreign Office used to have extremely good criminologists.
I spent a week shadowing in the office of the two chaps, Craig and Alan, who were the deep experts on Russia, who interpreted between Putin and Blair in phone calls and whatnot.
And they were constantly cringing at the rise of these new Liz Truss type figures, from desk level and now right up to ministerial level, who just think, you know, it's 1938 all over again, guys, the rest is detail.
So we don't have anyone watching this.
The Continentals do have in their foreign ministries and their defence ministries and in their journalist training, even in those wretched state-aligned broadcasters they have like German ARD, they do have proper Russianists and proper people who learn Ukrainian and Georgian to fluency.
We don't.
Very few.
The ones we do are locals, Who we bring into our, even in our intelligence agencies in some cases, certainly our journalistic outfits.
We put a badge on them that says you're now BBC or you're now NSA, but they are locals.
You know, they're not native English speakers who can speak with our inflections and nuances to our people.
We don't have such people.
The advice given to media seniors and to ministers is always going to be a flattened picture.
You're surprising me, Alex, slightly.
Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting that these are just innocent mistakes, that it's kind of ignorance and lack of understanding of the Eastern European situation and of politics and bad translations and stuff.
Which is leading the media astray.
Now, hang on a second.
I've watched how the media has performed in the last two years.
Relentlessly lying.
Relentlessly promoting a government narrative.
Almost never questioning it.
Not questioning the vaccines.
Not questioning lockdowns.
Not questioning any of this stuff.
Pumping out lies.
Cherry-picking tame scientists and doctors who are pushing this narrative.
I'm seeing exactly the same thing going on right now with Ukraine.
Now, I can't... there's got to be more to it than that.
This is coordinated, surely, and the switch, the pivot... I mean, Lawrence Fox did actually a rather good tweet about this, you know, that like, well, one piece of good news in 72 hours that the pandemic has come to an end.
Now, and one more thing, one more detail.
I noticed in the Sunday papers that one of the Telegraph's health correspondents, who has been relentlessly pushing the Bill Gates narrative, is now being allowed to run pieces saying things like, well, it seems that some of the dissenting voices on lockdowns may have been right.
And it seems that we're even getting reports of people claiming compensation for vaccine injuries.
So what I'm trying to get out of you, and at the moment you're being all kind of reasonable and stuff, is an acknowledgement of what I think is happening.
So tell me about that.
Well, there are.
There's an iron fist in a velvet glove causing what you're describing.
The iron fist is Ofcom, Britain's ex-BBC stuffed regulator, mediator of truth for broadcasters.
So even when GB News occasionally has my colleague Patrick Henningsen on now, Or, indeed, Neil Oliver, as regards COVID, recently had Dr Mike Yeadon on.
You can imagine that the producers are screaming down the earpieces, don't go near this and that, because otherwise we'll lose our Ofcom license.
So that's the Iron Fist.
It's exactly equivalent to Ofsted, Britain's monopoly and state-aligned inspector of whether enough political correctness is being taught at schools.
You get these zealots, and I know that you know the Ofsted lady, Melanie, and as you correctly described recently, they are terribly nice girls usually, but they're zealots and head girl type personalities who want to be liked above all, right?
So Dr Edward Dutton, exactly, Dr Edward Dutton has the best analysis on this, the Jolly Heretic, the head girl personality type, and the iron will to be liked and so on, and not to go too far.
So that's the Iron Fist.
The Velvet Glove is In any media set, and it's true when the Third Reich and the Soviet Union were falling as well, people smell which way the wind's blowing, even if they have become, in most cases, deaf to what the plebs think, or couldn't care less that the plebs are suffering.
They sense the swell, the crest of a wave, and will change direction.
They'll turn on a sixpence.
So there is a lot of that too.
And the third element, I was talking about bloodlines and I could go, I won't bore you with all the Soviet stuff.
If you want to know that in detail, listen to Anthony Sutton being interviewed about Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution.
And he gives examples from literally from 1917 to 1991, right?
And he's got the receipts, he's got the documents.
He's deceased, but he describes that in his books and his interviews.
So if you understand that that was all.
You know, put in place by the bloodlines.
You'll also understand that they have the will, the means, the motive also to train journalists directly, to co-opt some of them.
And a very few get brought into a back room and told, well, the plan is world domination and you must spin this narrative today.
A few of them exist, Pepe, around the institutions of the media.
Yeah, but so every newspaper has somebody who's what?
working for, or get, let's put it another way, they get privileged briefings from the MI5 and the CIA and in return for this they push a particular narrative.
Is that how it works?
Yes, James, I think that is fair.
At GCHQ we didn't do any of that, but I'm not putting it past MI5 and MI6 to have done that.
They would even claim they have a brief from their parent agencies, their parent ministries, to do that, to pull aside and brief selected media people.
I know it happens, and here we get the bloodlines again, I know it happens with, for example, Sanitizing intelligence on threats to corporate monopolies that are British headquarters and pulling them aside, often MI5, sometimes MI6, I think, and saying, you're about to lose your advantage, you might want to do something about your intellectual property.
I was told by an MI5 briefing guy for new officers of all three agencies that they call that the A-list of companies.
That was the first seed sown in me during my time at GCXQ that thought, are we actually serving bloodlines here?
Not that I used that word back then.
But there's an A-list of companies that MI5 says, we're here to shore you up by means fair and foul.
Ultimately, that's not, that goes beyond, in the human rights era, they call that, this is justified because the right to privacy is qualified by our rights to have economic well-being.
That's the spiel they use.
But you've got to go the whole hog with that analysis and say, it's the economic well-being of certain thieves and hoarders of intellectual property that's being served here.
It's not the nation.
It's certain companies that pursue the City of London's interests.
Yes.
And they're above the crown.
That's the key insight.
They're above the crown.
They set up, under color of law, such things as intelligence agencies and statutes in order to continue fostering that model.
Give me some examples of those companies.
Right, well let's talk about the British headquartered ones.
Certainly the four auditors, the big four auditors, KPMG, which is Anglo-Dutch, Ernst & Young, Deloitte, which of course has got some French background to it, and the fourth, whose name eludes me right now, Our colleague Debbie Evans, our nursing correspondent, gave testimony to great day two of Rainer Fielmich's grand jury on that.
They've got their fingers in every pie.
If you Google the names, or I should say search the names, search for the names using your preferred engine, of any of those four, big four auditing firms, whom by the way the Russians have been kicking out because they correctly accused them of sucking up military secrets.
They're technocratic organizations.
They're very close to the top of the tree.
You've interviewed Patrick Wood, you know what technocracy is.
If you search for any of the names of the big four City of London headquartered auditors, together with a name, a sexy technology of the moment, or even a disease that's the talk du jour, such as it will soon be, we think, tuberculosis or HIV, but at the moment COVID, you will see, or biotechnologies or whatever, you will see that they themselves are very much involved in it.
And because they're auditors, people think, oh, it's bland and innocuous.
Let MI5 brief away and tell them what's going on.
But, you know, at the board level, it's a revolving door.
from agencies, from ministries, through to regulators which are fully captured, same in America and Europe, through to these auditors who impose their own, like the WHO now with a treaty covenant that's coming in, these auditors too impose their own parallel international law.
This is what the Western, the NATO powers mean by the rules-based international order and the new one that uses European security framework.
What they mean is Parallel international law.
And in the case of the auditors, that's done by the accounting norms being imposed on every country, including very powerful ones like Russia.
They're not sovereign in these terms.
They're effectively forced to give up their goodies to the city.
As always, when talking to you, Alex, I wish we had about five hours and another five hours tomorrow.
Well, we'll do this one day.
Eventually, we'll cover all the things that need to be covered.
But I just want to bring you back to a big question on my mind, which is Putin.
He's not a goodie, clearly, but is he not as bad as some of the bad baddies?
I mean, what should we think about him?
Okay, let me put it another way.
Is he playing the World Economic Forum's game?
Is he a WEF stooge or not?
He's not.
He's not playing the WF's game.
Let's not be facile here and say, because we found Putin's name on Khrushchev's list, he's another one of the cabal spooks, right?
Cabal shadow men, right?
It's a bit more complicated than that.
I mean, I've spoken for hundreds of hours to my UK column colleagues, as you can imagine, about Putin's personality and to experts in the region I trust to keep a low profile.
And if you want me to condense it right down, it is that Putin started off nefarious in the old KGB way, and at some point he turned his back on the Western cabal in much the same way as Stalin did.
I'm not suggesting a moral equivalence between the two, but from the purposes of, from the point of view of the City of London, what matters is Stalin at circa 1943-44 And Putin circa 2006 both said stuff this I'm not I'm not playing anymore to be a franchisee in the city and city and Manhattan bloodline model.
I'm going to be my own new world order.
Thank you very much.
And in some ways, in some ways, much more freedom loving and progressive, not in all ways.
And I have to, for example, mention religious liberty, because the only kind of tolerated Christian In anything that Putin controls or that that Putin model controls is going to be Eastern Orthodox, you know, so there's not going to be much dissent.
I'm not saying that that's the whole of the game, but that's an important caveat to mention.
Let's say this, he doesn't actively murder and fiddle with the demographics of his own country.
He doesn't actively want to mind control his own country.
Even if you're inclined to be anti-Putin, and everyone in the older generation seems to be because of a lifetime of conditioning.
You could say perhaps that he is redolent of one of those old-style Greek despots that didn't even claim to be moral or revolutionary, they just wanted obedience.
You can't go much further than that and say that Putin's on board with everything.
There are certainly some nasty guys in Russia who want that, who are very much on board with WAF and digital ID and shipping.
He isn't.
Right.
Some of his economic guys are, and at regional level some of the regional leaders very much are.
Not Putin and not his faction within the Kremlin, which is but one faction.
Part of the Duma and part of the Kremlin is now taking against Putin and his recently promoted Defense Minister Shoigu, who might be his anointed successor, and are saying, get out of the way old men, because about a third of the country wants to be in some way westernized and is not very keen on this war.
Not just because they might want to dodge the draft, but because they just don't like that vision of Russia.
And they'd rather invest Russia's money in something else.
Right.
So...
I saw, again, this is the Hall of Mirrors, who doesn't know whom to trust or anything, but what about these reports that the Russian military are taking out experimental places producing new versions of coronavirus or whatever?
Tell me, what's going on there?
It's not so much vaccine, this is where nuances matter, it is biolabs.
CIA biolabs run under diplomatic cover in military installations with a flag of, well a US flag for diplomatic cover, but with a flag of the nation or the Ministry of Defence or the Ministry of Health of either Ukraine or Georgia on top.
So these are real?
Go to dilyana.bg, that's These are real, and they're being heavily censored.
Go to D-I-L-Y-A-N-A dot B-G, the website of the fantastic ex-mainstream Bulgarian journalist, Diljana Gaitanjieva, to find out how she's been reporting on that for years, risking arrest in Georgia and Ukraine.
Effectively, the three main Eurasian adversaries, Russia, China and Iran, or if we're more bloodline-centric, we would say the countries to be tolerated and kept in check.
Yeah, those three countries are now ringed, not just by U.S.
NATO missile facilities, U.S.
really, to be honest, but also by Pentagon slash CIA biolabs, which appear from a lot of Dilyana and other people's reporting to be geared towards genetically attacking the Slavic and Han Chinese and Persian populations in some way.
But that's not the whole of the story.
The whole bloodline, as you've been seeing, if you've been following the Grand Jury with Rainer Fumich, The whole plan as a whole is to edit the genes of the whole of mankind and only have obedient and compliant, upgraded humans in the future.
So the ethnic war component, as always with statehood, is not the key one.
When we're talking at bloodline level, they don't care about nationality.
They care about the flows of energy, population and currency.
Those three things which form a triangle.
That explains the migrant crisis of 2016 and most of the 20th century.
They don't see flags.
They see flows of energy, money and currency.
Right, okay.
Which is why, in a nutshell, we have to cut off their money flows and have our own currencies.
And I'm not proposing one solution, but in outline, we have to be rid of their currency, because that is the most basic or fundamental way to sever their influence at the root.
Right.
Well, you see... To this day, the control they have of Russia is mainly through the financial currency flows, as Georgette Borrell has been making perfectly clear over the weekend.
Right, okay.
I wish we could go off down that particular alleyway, but I just wanted to focus on the... Okay, so we've done the labs.
Tell me about... I was astonished to see that the biggest donations by country to Hillary Clinton came from Ukraine.
I was trying to explain to my wife the other day that the Ukraine was basically a deep state money laundering entity, but I didn't have the facts at my fingertips so I couldn't really explain how it worked or who was involved or what's what.
So tell me a bit about that.
I've deliberately not kept up chapter and verse on this because it ultimately is more US-centric and there's a clutch of brilliant US analysts and I don't want to duplicate their efforts on their own home turf.
So I would say do talk to Charles Ortell and Jason Goodman about this and I can certainly give you their details but they're well known to many people in the free media.
But in a nutshell there, and it's not just the Democrats but it seems particularly to be the Democrats' oligarch families, The wheeze was to get a clapped out politician with issues, they all have issues, and that's why they get promoted to that level, and to say your even more feckless son is going to get a sinecure as a non-executive director of a Ukrainian, in many cases, gas company.
And that will allow them to benefit from all kinds of nefariousness.
And this is where NATO comes in again, because the FBI whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds, has made it perfectly clear that Central Asia, Turkey, Belgium and then London and Washington is a well-known smuggling route for all kinds of illicit products and people.
Right, that doesn't get touched.
It's at moments like that that you see just how much of a protection racket, a shakedown, NATO is.
It's just, you know, the victors of 1945 divvying up the spoils.
And in that compass, which NATO is increasingly baring its teeth to show that it is again, although it now seems to be competing with a Franco-German, genuinely continental military alliance, since Schultz's speech yesterday, but, you know, whoever wins, wins out, the Anglos or the Continentals there, the idea will be the military alliance
is the ability, represents the ability to keep corrupting the border states, the keystone states, and say, you know, give our, literally, our ruling clans enrichment by appointing them to sinecures on the boards of these companies that are up to who knows how much wickedness, in every sense.
Human trafficking of the worst kinds and everything else.
Why Ukraine particularly?
Is it just because it's so corrupt or is it because it's got commodities or what?
How do...?
The Ukrainians are spectacularly high quality people in all regions of the country.
Right.
And they've got their moral sense.
After long exposure to them, I'm saying that I would say this definitively, their moral sense is not a whit below ours.
In fact, it's above ours.
They're less corrupted.
The state has perennial corruption problems, even more than roughly comparable, highly educated, highly developed post-Soviet countries.
And the reason to me has to be in other Soviet republics like Georgia, it would be the undue influence of a particularly corrupt wing of the Orthodox Church.
In Estonia, it would be that the Brits and Americans stayed behind too much.
In the Ukraine, I think the fundamental reason why there's this perennial corruption is that they haven't worked out what they are as a nation yet.
They haven't done their philosophical homework.
Part of that is drawing their borders and saying this bit is Ukraine proper.
And part of it is, and I have to say, my beloved Ukrainian Baptists are one good example, and by no means the only one.
The Catholics in the West, the Uniates, are very good at this as well.
They are trying to inject the morality and the first principles into the state so that the state knows what it is.
And of course, the patriotic and good people within all flavors of orthodoxy are doing the same out there as well.
And that's the dominant religion.
That hasn't happened yet.
You know, so they are continually beset by a disproportionate influence of these nutters and unspeakable dregs of society who get themselves seats in the Verkhovna Rada and in one case get themselves filmed masturbating in Parliament while talking to their fancy women.
These are the same guys who then pose with their cameras up in the Rada saying, help, save us!
And the thing is, one day they're saying save us from Russia and the next day they're saying save us from NATO.
You know, they're very, very easily bought off to the other side, as are the oligarchs in the Ukrainian area, right?
The Akhmetovs and the like.
They're always defecting from one side to the other.
That's the issue for the Ukrainians these days, and they're the prime example of it.
Sort out who you are as a people and develop a kind of nationhood that is, I hate to use this word because it's so bland these days, but that is inclusive, that will tolerate people of different ethnicities and religions within your borders.
Give them federal solutions.
There are those who say, are there not, that Alex Jones, for example, I think, was predicting that there would be a war in the Ukraine in February, and he was predicting this last year.
Now, if it was obvious to Alex Jones, that must mean that something...
This was all part of a plan.
We've had the populace terrified with Covid.
They've been frightened into wearing masks.
All the kind of elements of the biosecurity state have been ushered in as far as it's possible without meeting massive resistance.
And then instantly, suddenly, we've just moved on to the Ukraine thing.
That's not an accident, is it?
No, no, and I've got to keep a level head here.
It would be tempting for me, and I would have a lot of cheerleading to do if I said this, it would be tempting to say that at the last minute the Kremlin heroically stepped in to stop World War Three.
I'm not saying that that's a Buncombe argument, but again it's not the whole of the matter.
Putin and his faction in the Kremlin, Who, I stress again, are not the whole of Russian power, but they dominate it, seem to have thought, well, now's the chance.
They've even said it through friendly channels and channels that they half control.
They thought to themselves, well, America is waning financially, militarily, the currency is collapsing, the trust for the West in its own elite is collapsing.
They're getting more and more adventurous with this Nazism on our borders.
Now's the time to prevent a repeat of World War II, in which we suffered unspeakably.
Yeah, so that's true.
So, if they played a clever game, they probably did, as I'm certain they did in 2008 in the run-up to the South Ossetia war in Georgia, probably did get their local militias, their local stooges, to provoke artillery fire, in this case by the Ukrainians in 2008, by the Georgians, in order to set up what the Russians would call provocatsiya, the provocation.
Which was a pretext for them to roll in and flatten the Georgians slash Ukrainians.
But that model has been played both sides.
I understand it perfectly well.
It's realpolitik.
Yeah.
But that's probably what was in Putin's mind.
And they are now telegraphing because they think they're on a roll.
Although they're facing much fiercer resistance than they thought.
But they are now telegraphing.
Look, from now on, we have a sphere of influence again.
Which is, you know, to be fair, not such an unexpected thing for a great power to have.
What they're saying is it's no longer just NATO or the Anglo-American elite that can have a sphere of influence.
By the same token, they're saying we can have one and the Chinese can have one again.
They're also saying the European continentals, the Franco-German axis, can have one.
Right.
But, okay, just... I'm not sure, maybe it's impossible to know, but how much coordination has there been going on here?
Because, like, how has COVID suddenly stopped?
And being replaced by this new narrative.
How much, how conscious of this is Putin, or is it just an accidental by-product of his territorial interests?
I think there's a fair amount there of the Kremlin calculating, look, the West is getting fed up here, and now's the time to strike while the iron is hot.
You know, and by the way, for those who don't know the origins of that proverb, strike means shake the iron.
It doesn't mean strike as in hit someone, you know, attack.
It's just a by the by about that idiom.
But so in that sense, I think Putin thought now's the time to strike in a sense of fashion, fashion the world while things are bendy and malleable.
Right.
But the other half of it is they're very, you know, skilled and realistic and hard-nosed analysts, and they realize that within the West, You know, or anywhere in the world, only one big worry, one big bugbear can occupy people's minds at a time, whether they're journalists or people.
In a sense, and both America and Russia are now saying this, they're empires and they create their own realities.
That phrase is being uttered now from both DC and from the Kremlin.
Yes.
In other words, if we do something big and bold, then COVID will go by the board, even though there was a faction of the oligarchy that wanted to milk that till Kingdom Come, those who sit on the boards of pharmaceutical companies.
But for a time, this is how the oligarchy works, you know.
They're being told, well, you had your day in the sun.
Out you go for a while and we'll play the war card.
And the bloodline families that are more into munitions and the war propaganda will benefit.
Right.
I see.
I see.
Okay.
There's musical chairs.
You're dealing with gangsters, right?
So, the uneasy truce, you know, between Anglos, Germanics, a few Slavs at the top, these days a few Chinese, and I'll be lambasted if I don't mention it, a few Zionists are in the model as well, by no means as dominant as you might think.
A few Indians these days.
As I said, nationality is secondary to these guys.
They have an uneasy truth simply because of all those nationalities and worldviews coming together.
But what dominates it is the fear, oh dear, part of the world or part of the population domestically is breaking away from the model.
Then they will patch things up between them in order to chase away that threat to the dominance of the oligarchic model, the fear-based model.
We've forgotten one other detail, and you've just mentioned it, and I've completely forgotten about this.
What about the Khazarian connection with Ukraine?
Is there anything in that, that there are these Khazarian Jews or whatever in Israel who are trying to establish a... this is the goal, they're trying to establish some kind of state in... tell me about that.
Well, the two big books on it are Двести лет вместе by Solzhenitsyn, Two Hundred Years Together.
Volume one is up to the Russian Revolution, so that goes into the historic stuff, which is very hard to get hold of in English, although nowadays there is a full PDF and a full audiobook produced by volunteers in the underground, basically.
And there is also Arthur Koestler's book, K-O-E-S-T-L-E-R, The Thirteenth Tribe.
These are the two serious contentions that have been made, one Russian and one Central European, learned books arguing that the Khazarians are a dominant part of what's now Ashkenazi Jewry.
Nobody doubts that the Khazarians converted, that's mainstream history, as did many other nations, like the South Arabians under Dhu Nuwas chose Judaism as a proselytized religion.
That happened a lot in the early Christian centuries, that the rabbinic Judaism of the time was still actively seeking, as Christ said in Matthew 24, compassing earth and sea to make disciples.
To make even one disciple.
Judaism dropped that proselytism arm later, right?
So while it was still doing that, the Khazarian certainly converted.
The question is more genetic and archaeological and physiognomic as to how much of what became European Ashkenazi Jewry first in Italy, then Western Europe, then Eastern Europe, how much of that is Khazarian as opposed to having a link back genetically to the Holy Land?
That is a pretty murky question.
And the biblical and straightforward and common-sense answer always has to be, what culture are these people propagating now?
Whose spiritual sons and daughters do they say that they are?
That's far more meaningful a question than, you know, what genetic skeletons do they have in the closet?
Right.
So it's clear as mud again.
We just don't know.
So what's Kazaria?
Was that where Ukraine is now?
Because of a blip in the line, you'll have to repeat that, I'm afraid. - Well, Where was Khazaria?
It was the broad Isthmus between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, but on the northern side of the Great Caucasus mountain chain.
So it's the southern Russian steppe.
Just above modern day, that modern day belt of Muslim republics with Dagestan going westwards through Chechnya to Bulgaria, just above there, so just about the part of Russia where it gets narrow and where it gets a bit hot and dry.
Right, right, I see.
Just east, in fact, just east of the modern Ukrainian border, which is why some people get terribly excited and some think that world Zionism is going to decamp to a second homeland up there.
I don't buy it.
You don't buy it?
I would love to talk to you more Alex, but I'm conscious that you've got to do a thing in like 10 minutes, and you probably need a gap.
So look, I promise you, you'll be back soon.
Well, soon-ish, given my organisation abilities.
But please do, because I love it when you come on the show, and you've got so much to say.
So just remind people where they can find your stuff, those who don't know already.
If the question... I think I heard it rightly, because there was another blip.
If the question is where they can follow us, the best way is ukcolumn.org.
I also now have a Telegram channel, which is Eastern Approaches.
The best way to find it is the direct URL t.me.eastapp.
That will get you to my Telegram channel, which is not intended as a competitor to my UK Column work, but to draw people towards the UK Column work.
But a lot more detail goes in there than I'm able to broadcast on UK column.
Shall I also finish with a rendition of the Ukrainian national anthem for you?
Yes, you can.
Yes, please, do.
Here we go.
Ukraine has not yet died, neither glory nor freedom, yet our brothers Ukrainians will smile at this fate.
Our enemies are like dew in the sun.
.
That is so much nicer than our national anthem.
It's so much more from the heart, isn't it?
Wow.
That is so much nicer than our national anthem.
It's so much more from the heart, isn't it?
That's beautiful.
Well, it's proclaiming, not in as many words, but proclaiming that our country is no longer disappeared from the map.
You know, that's what happened to them over history.
But I stress only the Western bit.
Right.
So this isn't that doesn't this is not the sentiment of people in the Crimea or the Donbass.
Right.
Or even in the very far West.
But the sentiment is we will once again be lords in our own land and we're going to lay down our lives.
Right.
So there you are, that's what they're putting into practice.
And they're not all nutters and neo-Nazis who are doing this.
They're simply people who don't want a life dominated by an eastern dictatorship instead of a western one.
Yeah, I totally see that and I think everyone can agree on that.
We feel great sympathy for the Ukrainian people who are just kind of pawns of two superpowers, or maybe three.
Three superpowers.
Alex, thank you for being on the show.
May I remind my beloved, beloved viewers and listeners, I really appreciate your support on Patreon, on Subscribestar.
I'm now on Locals and on Substack.
So one way or the other, you can support more wonderful podcasts like the one I've just done with Alex.
Thank you very much, Alex.
And let's have you on again soon.
Very gladly, James.
Thank you.
Great.
Thanks a lot.
▲
Export Selection