Even the most astute among us can fall victim to a well-crafted deception, and I fear that this is precisely what is happening to many Westerners regarding the alleged “tensions” between Russia and the West.

Many are well-versed in the machinations of the central banking cabal and its grip on the US and Europe. Yet, some inexplicably refuse to entertain the notion that global bankers are also pulling the strings in Russia, playing both sides of the escalating economic war.

If you believe that Russia is going to save us from the New World Order, this article is for you.  If you have lifted the covers, looked a little deeper and feel something is not quite right with the West-Russia rivalry that is being promoted, this article will help you consolidate your thoughts.

For background reading, you may be interested to read a 2014 article titled ‘Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too’.  This 2014 article and the article that follows cover similar ground relating to the buildup to where we are today.  You may also find our article ‘Burkina Faso: UN is tracking and controlling refugees’ cash and relief aid using digital IDs’ which shows how it is not only the West and Russia that are dominated and manipulated by the self-styled elite financial interests.

The Danger of Co-option and False Prophets

By A Lily Bit

In the wake of Tucker Carlson’s much-publicised interview with Vladimir Putin and his subsequent display of what can only be described as “clueless man babbles one-dimensional nonsense in admiration for Russia in a supermarket,” we find ourselves confronted with an important issue: Either Carlson is a master in controlled opposition, skillfully playing his part in a grand geopolitical chess game; or he is just masterfully milking the easily-misled for clicks, views, attention and money.

Even the most astute among us can fall victim to a well-crafted deception, and I fear that this is precisely what is happening to Carlson and other disappointed Westerners regarding the alleged “tensions” between Russia and the West.

In my previous article, ‘Why the Globalists Engineered the Ukraine Crisis’, I outlined the history of false paradigms and manufactured conflicts, all orchestrated by global money interests to consolidate and centralise power.

The very creation of communist Russia was funded by Western banks and bolstered by military aid from the US government. (You can read more HERE.) These inconvenient truths are conveniently omitted from our educational institutions, as the continued dominance of the money elite hinges on the perpetuation of historical misrepresentations.

Many of my readers are well-versed in the machinations of the central banking cabal and its grip on the US and Europe. Yet, some inexplicably refuse to entertain the notion that global bankers are also pulling the strings in Russia, playing both sides of the escalating economic war.

As the Ukrainian crisis continues and other threats loom in the Pacific and the Mideast, a peculiar consensus has emerged among alternative analysts. They seem to believe that President Vladimir Putin, Russia and the holy calf of BRICS represent a bulwark against globalisation and the rule of corporate financiers.

Perhaps Putin’s rhetoric and the presence of controlled media opposition puppets like Carlson and “alternative” media Twitter “influencers” have beguiled elements of American and European “awoken individuals” into viewing Russia as a “victim” of Western oligarchy, a valiant “white knight” standing against the New World Order. However, I must inform you that this could not be further from the reality.

The global money elite does not play favourites; they play to win. They do not care about national boundaries or political ideologies. They are the puppet masters, and Putin, like so many others, is merely one of their puppets. To believe otherwise is to fall victim to the grandest of deceptions, one that could have dire consequences for the world at large.

The rebirth of Russia as a regional federation in the 1990s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, was orchestrated by the global elite, with Mikhail Gorbachev serving as their willing puppet.

Gorbachev, who is often credited with the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the rise of the “new” Russia, has long been an advocate for a centralised global government, or a “New World Order,” as he called it.

In an address to the students of Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania, Gorbachev lamented that the opportunities presented by the end of the Cold War were not utilised properly and that the world was still facing crises such as environmental degradation, poverty, and food shortages. He argued that these problems could only be solved through the establishment of a system of global governance.

When asked in 1995 by the San Francisco Weekly what Gorbachev meant by the phrase “New World Order,” Jim Garrison, the executive director of the Gorbachev Foundation, responded that Gorbachev was advocating for nothing less than global government. Garrison went on to predict that such a government would be established within the next 20 to 30 years, a prediction that seems increasingly plausible given the recent push towards a global currency.

Gorbachev envisioned this global government being achieved through international organisations such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. However, it is clear that this vision is not limited to Gorbachev and his inner circle.

At the Gorbachev-led State of the World Forum in 1995, Council on Foreign Relations member Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that progressive regionalisation was the precondition for eventual globalisation, as it would lead to larger, more stable, and more cooperative units.

“We do not have a New World Order. … We cannot leap into world government in one quick step. … In brief, the precondition for eventual globalisation – genuine globalisation – is progressive regionalisation, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.”—Zbigniew Brzezinski

In other words, the global elite are using regionalisation as a stepping stone towards their ultimate goal of global governance. And Russia, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, is playing right into their hands.

Despite his rhetoric to the contrary, Putin is nothing more than a socialist puppet, serving the interests of the global elite at the expense of the Russian people. The false dichotomy of Russia versus the West is nothing more than a distraction, a ruse designed to keep us divided and conquered. The true enemy is the global money elite, and it is time for many to recognize this and take action accordingly.

In Zbigniew K. Brzezinski’s book ‘Between Two Ages: America’s Role In The Technetronic Era’, he provides a clear picture of the ideology behind the New World Order. Brzezinski asserts that the concept of national sovereignty is no longer viable, and that more intensive efforts must be made to shape a new world monetary structure. He goes on to say that Marxism represents a further vital and creative state in the maturing of man’s universal vision, and that it is simultaneously a victory of reason over belief.

Brzezinski’s views align with those of Gorbachev, and it is worth noting that Brzezinski was a close and influential foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama. This is a clear indication that the push for a New World Order and global government with a decidedly socialist or Marxist form is not just a relic of the past, but an ongoing effort by political interests on both sides.

The new Russia was designed to serve as a catalyst for global governance, but who exactly are the global elite seeking to establish this new world order? The answer, as always, lies in following the money.

After the collapse of the Russian economy and the dissolution of the old Soviet Union, the country was in dire need of financial assistance. From 1992 to 1996, the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”) intervened in the Russian economy, offering more than $22 billion in aid (officially). However, this first loan package was presented as a failure when Russia defaulted on its debts, and loans from the IMF restarted through the late 1990s until this very day.

While many are aware of the IMF’s involvement in Russia, few know about the scandal surrounding where those IMF funds specifically went. In 1999, it was revealed that IMF cash had been diverted into the coffers of Russian corporate elites, politicians and even mobsters. The money was supposed to go toward the rebuilding of Russian infrastructure and economy, but instead, it was funnelled into the hands of the aristocracy and criminal underworld.

The money was diverted and laundered through the Bank of New York, an institution founded in 1784 by none other than internationalist agent and central bank promoter Alexander Hamilton. The bank changed ownership through a merger in 2007 and is now called The Bank Of New York Mellon.

The IMF’s initial reaction to the scandal was to deflect responsibility, asserting that they had no authority over the funds once they were transferred to the Central Bank of Russia (“CBR”). However, as more evidence emerged of mismanaged or vanished funds, the IMF enlisted PricewaterhouseCoopers to audit the CBR.

The results of this audit have never been disclosed to the public. In 1999, the Russian government acknowledged concealing over $50 billion offshore in a subsidiary bank in the Channel Islands, with a portion of this money originating from IMF bailouts. The former CBR chairman, Sergey Dubinin, maintained that the IMF was fully aware of the recipients of these funds.

Several Russian officials, ranging from the chief state auditor to the minister of internal security to the prosecutor general, presented information supporting the evidence that IMF funds were being funnelled to unintended recipients. The chairman of the Duma Committee on Security claimed that some IMF loans never even reached Russia, and were instead deposited into the secret foreign accounts of Russia’s highest-ranking officials.

Despite the admissions and evidence, IMF auditors declined to acknowledge any corruption or wrongdoing during their investigations. One might assume that they would exhaust all efforts to discover the whereabouts of their funds and the reasons for their misuse.

However, the reason for the cover-up is clear: the IMF knew exactly who was receiving the money. The initial bailouts of Russia were intended to secure the cooperation of the Russian political and corporate elite and ensure that the nation’s future trajectory aligned with the globalist agenda.

Fast-forward to the present and Putin continues the clandestine relationship between Russia and the IMF. In 2009, Putin advocated for the establishment of a “super reserve currency” under the IMF’s control, utilising the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket as a basis.

Why would Putin, allegedly an anti-globalist nationalist leader, desire the IMF, supposedly a US-controlled organisation, to be the worldwide controller of the global economy? The answer is simple: the IMF is not a US-controlled institution; it is a banker-controlled institution. And Putin is a globalist, not a nationalist.

The separation of Crimea from Ukraine and its annexation to Russia was partly provoked by the extensive concessions demanded by the IMF for Ukraine to receive loans. One of these concessions involved transferring Ukrainian gas pipelines to America’s Chevron. Crimean leaders accused Kiev politicians of betraying Ukraine to the global bankers.

However, it was actually Russia’s finance minister and Putin who initially advocated for the IMF bailout of Ukraine. In fact, it was Putin who wanted Ukraine to “sell out” to Western financiers.

Russia’s central bank is also a member of the Bank of International Settlements (“BIS”), an exclusive club of international banking elites. Founded in 1930, the BIS served as the centre of globalisation until after World War II, when evidence emerged that the organisation had aided the Nazis by funding the German war machine, laundering money for Gestapo officials, and hiding funds looted from Europe by the Third Reich.

Despite the scandal, the BIS still exists today, and Carroll Quigley, a Council on Foreign Relations member, elitist insider, and mentor to Bill Clinton, had this to say about the BIS in his book ‘Tragedy And Hope’:

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.

The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.

Before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Putin had been elevated to heroic status in much of the corporate media. TIME magazine, a long-running globalist publication, even published a front-page article with the tagline: “America’s weak and waffling. Russia’s rich and resurgent – and its leader doesn’t care what anybody thinks of him.”

Today, it is troubling to see the level of admiration and worship for Putin within the ranks of disappointed Westerners. While some may see him as a hero in the fight against globalisation and the New World Order, the truth is that Russia and the US are merely false champions duelling in a fake gladiator match paid for by the IMF.

The war against Syria was not thwarted because of Putin’s intervention, but rather because of the tireless efforts of the alternative media in exposing the lies behind the Syrian insurgency and the CIA’s involvement with al-Qaida. It is independent journalism that deserves credit for disrupting the globalist plan to use Syria as a trigger event for a false confrontation between the US and Russia.

The most frightening aspect of this false paradigm is the potential for the co-option of liberty proponents in America. If we allow ourselves to be sucked into cheerleading for Russia, or any controlled government, we will lose sight of our mission for a truly free and sovereign America.

We must accept that the future of human freedom rests solely on our shoulders. There is no other nation that will come to our aid in the fight against the globalist agenda and neither will BRICS serve as an “alternative model.” Overlooking mounting evidence – the criminalisation of free speech in Brazil, the advanced CBDC and digital ID efforts in Russia, the inhumane Aadhaar system in India, the social credit system in China – to keep one’s own fragile worldview intact, seems to be common on all sides of the political spectrum.

We must resist the temptation to follow false prophets and artificial protagonists. The fight for freedom and sovereignty will not be won by supporting controlled governments or falling for the false paradigms created by the elites.

It is only through our own efforts and resistance that we can hope to achieve a truly free and sovereign America. The sooner we come to terms with this reality, the stronger we will be when the fight begins.

About the Author

A Lily Bit self-describes as a former intelligence operative analysing The Great Reset, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, propaganda, totalitarianism, current narratives, psychology and history.  You can subscribe to and follow A Lily Bit on Substack HERE.