yes, we love it, of course, we have a self-assembly tablecloth there or self-propelled boots, so that it somehow happens a philosopher's stone, somehow something, well, with some one magical action, once and for all. and victory does not happen like this, of course, so we must face the historical challenge. you said about a liter of rhinestones that this is the minister of foreign affairs. i volodya will argue with you a little . but so we already, well, sometimes the air confuses. i'll argue with you a little. look, you understand how it was, it was not a speech minister of foreign affairs and not the speech of the minister of defense. this is the prime minister's speech. uh, and uh, she, well, there behind this, it's pointless to compare her dash, fucking, senselessly, through the titan of politics. it 's an empty place, but very organized. a huge

body of image-making consulting and everything that should be there pr spy and all sorts of other marketing terms. i didn't forget anything, what else is going on there? that's all it's working for her. here, including the writing of these same texts, and the only difference is in one she makes a speech proclaiming war before entering the post prime minister. and churchill proclaimed the cold war after leaving the post of prime minister, in principle, there is no difference. i always love to cling to words. here, too, i will attach a declaration of war - after all, this is a strict international legal and legal procedure. so i would call what she did. this is a declaration of war, a declaration of war. e, which does not beg the significance of what happened against the other, because if there was an announcement,

then with the formats it would be quite obvious. that's what they're hiding behind. yes, that's the way the way it works for them. yes, all the time, uh, putting up false mirrors and false panels behind which you can hide real actions is a strategy. and here are a few points. well, the first thing about europe , you understand, the thing is that europe knows very well that it is absolutely uncompetitive outside the structure of colonial robbery. that all their competitiveness was built for centuries on the ability and ability to rob and take away? here are those european countries that were deprived of this opportunities as portugal spain turned into wonderful areas for living growing olives and pasakos. germany, which in the 19th century

understood with its german mind that if it did not have anyone to rob, then it would end from this was the whole drama of the two subsequent wars. and by the way, that's all this alliance, which you talked about, was caused by exactly one britain, america, who had something to rob. evaluated and concluded what if suddenly hitler seizes russian resources? then agree with him, they can't go further. it's, well, it's all very simple, in fact, you know there is nothing and european politicians are not all the ones that you say, who pretend to be something there, are they clowns or not, you can replace them with other clowns, but those who knows about what is outside the plunder outside the colonial reproducing system? they have no

chance at all no second thing they know. well, for a long time now, that the world is behind empires and the next world will be either the world of one empire. this is a world according to the rules rules very simple rules write america must all obey these rules. america doesn't follow the rules for everything. here, either it will be like this, well, or it will go to the stage that it will compete with each other 2-3. the fantastic four imperial structures in the world also know this, and in planning everything that happens , they proceed from this from something else. this knowledge, you know , is based on history and on an analysis of what is happening now, by the way, the robbery is sometimes bizarrely arranged on the disparity of prices, and they

understand exactly that the opportunity not to pay extra through debt receipts. this knowledge of the establishment ended in america during the obama administration and the first crisis. all robbery through receipts came to a standstill, something else needs to be done. they also understood this now in relation to us, and what does the rhinestone proclaim the decision to destroy us? i believe, i am convinced of this, i can prove it was adopted in the twelfth year. the same group that belongs to the current asshole when he arrived and told putin that you have no right to be nominated, but putin did not accept. this is a requirement further. everything was decided. the first step was the maidan of the fourteenth year. this was a mandatory step, because without it ukraine

could not be turned into a means of war against us. who was the author of the maidan who supervised who did all this? well, all right . they did it all with their hands, right there physically, without hiding one during the maidan, another future vice president. and that's it. it would have worked straight if trump hadn't given us those four years. thank you very much, the evil one failed for 4 years. everything with you from ukraine should have played out with clinton as soon as they took trump away, two things happened zelensky was recruited to mi6 and zelensky was told, we have a plan to destroy russia , don't be afraid. you will come with us, we will achieve victory according to this plan, then he was told not to sign anything there, do not think of implementing the minsk agreements, we will destroy russia. well, then

everything is clear too. well, look, belarus kazakhstan caucasus navalny all this happened in a chain one by one in a compressed time frame of one and a half years. can you imagine i can't believe it's a coincidence that all these events take place in this period of time. so i ca n’t imagine. it’s an accident that this is all, so to speak, compressed normal. it should have raised a revolution here. belarus should have collapsed in the caucasus should have caught fire in kazakhstan, a coup should have taken place. after that, the ukrainian card was to be fully played. but what you're talking about happened, i just want to be taken seriously , you know, playing number one is not just words. here we played the first number

in this situation in a key way. we played in the donbass when it was appropriate. and in fact, firstly, the fact that the whole chain did not work and in ukraine did not go as they planned. not so they have to rebuild on the go. and look for well some explanation. what will happen next. therefore, from here such hatred is presented or rhinestones, but on the other hand. they themselves go into the ideology that we need, they proclaim according to a new colonial world. it is, in fact. leafraz said. she proclaimed we are at war to colonize the world. russia, an important next stage on this path will be china well, they mentioned indies, so, like, let's

start talking, they expect to fool, but no one will have any illusions, therefore, this is a declared war on their part, colonial on our part is anti-colonial. if we talk about fundamental ideologies, and this is what can really unite half of the world, but, but this is what is more than half of the world, because that the colonial world is much larger than the metropolitan world. he's bigger and this really needs to be clarified, but thank god that our media kicked out of the world of metropolitans, to hell with them, but we must become more active in this world of the colony incredibly and start talking to them with them. this is fundamentally important now, if we talk about the external e about the external

part. well, on trifles, karen georgievich is not for arguing, but simply for clarification. well, firstly, in our columns there are a huge number of videos when they travel under red flags, moreover, under the flag of victory yes 155 ilskaya is very much the first flag that hoisted all the flags of victory in the south but their copies and replicas, therefore one does not contradict the other at all and one is combined with the other and about money. understand to get ahead. here is an interesting question. they announced that they were going to give it all up. we know their plans. this is the first. it is very important. so we can calculate. how do we act. thank you for announcing this, second. well you understand, yes, what we are now crying for them, they are crying putin now earns a billion dollars a day. on export, moreover, they cry a second time personally.

russia, they say so, of course, not putin, yes, russia receives a billion dollars a day, but they write that putin is so clearer to their layman. billion dollars a day think they underestimate there more second. from what does not cry, they do not understand how to grab this money. because, well, we are now doing, firstly, in the sale of oil, well, i don’t want to reveal everything, this, yes. according to rather complex schemes, both dollars and euros quickly turn either into goods, or they quickly turn into yuan, to which they have their hands there and something else that they cannot reach. this is the first and we need this capital, so we need it here. well, there's no need to get excited here. yes, with this case, we understand that they are striving for this, we understand that this will end. we must give them back now. well, this billion that we can use very useful very useful both in a

social sense and in a technology sense and everything the rest. but it's just you understand, it's just adding not even sports with you, but some other motive, which seems to me also very understandable and the founder, but in relation to e-gas for rubles. so this is generally, so to speak , the engine, because it knocks out the entire ideology of the comprodor that was before. uh, in our country, it turns out that the ruble emission is not connected with the external inflow of the dollar. we are free. finally , this will have very big consequences in the context of six months of the year, very big consequences. but when they already say what we are doing, we think for those to make a funded ruble, what if we decided to postpone something for a rainy day, not in currency, but in a funded ruble, which will be backed by gold on energy resources . then there will be no point at all in this currency. the doctor works normally. i

came up with such a world formula, what is our world today, this is soviet power plus flavoring the rest of the world, judging by your statements. yes, and here i am with dima, by the way, here i agree very much. i myself sat, thinking on the first of march 5, 1946, fulton's speech, of course, churchill, uh, what she said, she, in principle, repeated completely. this floor repeated this speech in full. and here are important to me a few uh hmm messages that she repeated, which is completely consistent with today's situation, what she said, what was said in churchill's speech that the united states is at the top of world glory and what now characterizes today's life is war and tyranny and presence the fifth column, which must be fought, that is, in

principle, if we sort it out. lie down the speech sheet once she talks about the same thing, that is, she actually calls the same thing, and she also uses the same expressions, of course, she completely agrees. this churchill is like heaven to her, as they say, but the fact that she used these expressions, e, allows us to really conclude that in all likelihood this is the strategic plan that the anglo-saxons have been developing for so long, by the way, churchill also said there in his speeches that i generally consider that the first world war has not yet ended, and the second world war. not over yet. they lead it, and they try to continue it further, but there are speeches since i found two wonderful moments, how i can’t pass by, on the one hand she says that our task is on the one hand. she says, our task is to give up everything connected with russia, not just supplies. in general, just cross out russia from everything to give up, but on the other hand. we must fight to the end with tyranny with tyrants. well, that is, in fact, repeating churchill. and here you ask yourself a

question. ah, if you're going to give up forever and you're going to fight tyranny and you 're going to fight russia then you don't believe that russia can be defeated. that is, if you refuse forever. why then fight tyranny? and why then do you put these plans that russia should be considered as some kind of goal for some kind of constant struggle. this is such a hmm such a duality of her speech, which on the one hand side, may not have been noticed by the compilers of these speeches. or maybe it was said on purpose, because i see something else behind it. i am connected with the term global nato and she used this term. global nato is like that. it seems to me that we are talking about a change in the world structure, connected primarily with the united nations, because for a long time there has been talk that the united nations should either be removed. in general, either reform it in some way, and in this regard there are several important points that

with whom i got involved. including germany is linked very closely, germany and germany a long time ago. he says that the time has passed when we were fucking defeated, and we would like to get at least a permanent seat on the security council. dim now i will finish. i know you want two me just, yes, and get his permanent seat on the security council. they understand that this is impossible; moreover, as far as i know the opinion, at least in germany, they are categorically against the destruction of the institution of the united nations have no other institution. they understand that even with all the minuses. with all the constant groans, russia uses the veto. russia does not provide an opportunity and a lot of some problems. all the same, the institution exists. it allows you to work in some way, and work with it in some way , but nevertheless, of course, it would be nice to limit russia in this and create conditions for entry. e germany here in this club.

the great ones are not for nothing. e schultz said, and we're all talking about it now, they emphasized that the old story ended, a new one began. that is, as if now is over, our yoke of the vanquished and the yoke. uh, rogue country criminal country, as they say, which means we have the right to enter the club of the greats. moreover, to enter the club of the great is no longer able to be on an equal footing with everyone, but in fact, being a vassal, uh, a big anglo-saxon brother, that is, in this regard, germany does not pose a danger not to france , uh, not to great britain or to the united states , even if it enters in such a manner and will take some place in the security council, but in order to do this, you need to get the consent of at least two countries china and russia, therefore, of course, what is being done with russia and these statements that russia needs forever these are attempts, including to bring russia to such a state, when russia will be in their opinion. here, in such a corner, when they

say, well, listen, well, let's just so that you do not touch us further, we make concessions. we will agree to the presence of the germans in security council. maybe we'll spread it. i'm telling you, i'm stating an opinion that i feel, uh, is there. uh, maybe russia will agree to somehow modify the right, the veto. what they have been striving for for a long time, so i would consider, uh, the strass speeches, just such an attempt to change the world structure. at the same time, realizing that at the moment, oddly enough, she will fully support her and, by the way, in germany well, in general, of the two women from christina lambry, i don’t choose either of you or strass. odessa on april 10, 44, she was liberated from the nazis. but may 2, 14

hello i'm already in the crimea, the weather is wonderful, 30 ° no one is rushing really. deal when i tell them about what i feel, they listen, but do not hear. and that's bad. no one can rewrite our history. this is just one of the folders prepared by the soviet

accusations for the international military tribunal in nuremberg, no one will always close the border for us. always online mouth so strong. wow , it won't break in the cold, we are watching the masterpieces of world documentary cinema. i rediscovered myself gagarin he is a hero, a real hero. now we really miss the classics, new items, exclusives. - 15 years free without registration watching. or the site decided to entrust both your kangaroos and shooting material for this film. i'm not afraid, the first oscar you see what the problem is

, it's not about these politicians. the fact is that they again lit up the age-old dream, and this unites this europe from politicians, businessmen to the latest burghers, the dream is that we finally have a chance again strategic vulnerability to stop forever taking possession of the territory of russia and we will use everything that we have for free somehow divided among ourselves. america will tell us who has what share, but each of his participation will have a share in russian wealth, and we are the question of our colonial vulnerability, finally, we will decide, of course , a person, it’s not difficult at all to say, take away your

sovereignty and live with it as you like. so part of the europeans felt this taste. the soviet union was collapsing nationalities, including the european union can and will fall apart also on the national issue. still, take seriously enough what is contained in this speech. madam transport, because it is obvious that apart from the fact that this is just a speech performance. it is also an ideological platform , very simple, extremely familiar, nothing new there. there is nothing new, not since the nineties, or even since the cold war. and since the time of pericles there, look, we are europe freedom democracy against us persia is asia slavery, and therefore we they must be fought against. there is absolutely nothing new here, and therefore you need to understand that this is a very traditional

paradigm for our opponents, in which they feel as comfortable as possible. it's just our first time. for yourself instead of resisting this paradigm or going your own paradigm. we are in this game. that is, we are trying all the time to prove that no, no, we are not an authoritarian state. we are democratic. although they came up with the idea that the state is either democratic, or authoritarian, or totalitarian. these are not some natural phenomena, to say either a thunderstorm or the sun, i don’t know, there are mountains of the steppe. no, it is absolutely a figment of the imagination that the state can be one of the three and we play by these rules. at the moment, you need to understand that the desire of our western opponents for e, such a comprehensive control over the whole of humanity, the spread of their own ideas, has very deep civilizational cultural roots, because our western opponents are primarily carriers of the catholic religious culture, in contrast to

let's say an orthodox culture, in which, uh, the orthodox church is as close as possible either to a particular nation or to larger ethnic groups in the catholic church. right now, the argentine heads the church before him there was a german before the german there was a pole before him there was an italian, but no one in this period considers this church, neither argentinean, nor polish, nor italian, nor german, any other way and this universalism. he shows us that all those ideologies that colleagues talked about today, both liberalism and fascism and marxism, none of them appeared in russia, none of them appeared in china, they all also appeared in the western world, because they are the bearers of this desire to create such a global idea that can control humanity, and in this case, mrs. trust did such traditional classical reliance on e, liberalism. very often now such assessments are heard saying that, well, you know, liberalism was originally

a good enough idea, but the liberals themselves perverted it, or is it modern liberalism bad in the beginning. from the very beginning, liberalism relied on a lie; it relied on a non-existent methodology. it was absolutely not scientific, and precisely because it contained all these critical errors. he had no other way than what he came to today. everything on which the operation of liberalism. it's a lie. we very often , in order to uh hmm create a more positive image for this ideology, let's say separate quotes, without bringing them to the end. and often here i cite this example, we read montaske. he says at every person has the right to vote. only he does not put a full stop there, he leaves a comma and says, but only with what his material condition allows him to have free will. well, we 'll never talk about it. we will never say that hmm, liberal ideas could spread in the west to those states in which

revolutions could be carried out, constitutions could be adopted , but to these colonies that they owned. they no longer spread, because, of course, human rights, but he still has a big question. who is there a person? and who is not, then the evolution of this ideology should gradually lead to what we came to today and in the first place. it 's endless. you open the text of this speech by mrs. trust. well, in every sentence the word freedom freedom freedom freedom freedom freedom as if it were privatization freedom on the part of liberalism. well, let's talk about freedom. what is freedom? freedom is first and foremost. true, if you remember, the famous book of 1984 said that freedom begins there, where you can say that two plus two equals four, because there, it means it was promoted that two plus two equals five and so he says, where you can say that two plus two equals four, there is freedom, because it is that it's true open. here are even analyzes of this book by

any modern liberal scholar, and they all criticize it for saying freedom is not where you can say that two plus two equals four. and where you can say that 2 + 2 = everything is sincere in something, you believe, this is the position of any modern liberal, that there is no truth, therefore, there is no marriage, as the union between a man and a woman, there is no sex, as an absolutely natural natural state of a person, because truth does not exist first of all, because initially liberalism began with the fact that it is everything time wants to free a person from everything. yes, maybe the first thing he was aiming at, there is a strict class division. something else that can cause sympathy, but after that he could not help but come to the conclusion that trying to free a person from his religious culture does not free him from his gender . the next step before that. this is what a person needs to be freed from the fact that he is a person, that the human is already evil, because it imposes a lot of restrictions, and freedom itself, no matter how

paradoxical it may sound, but freedom is the very limitation, a person is free because unlike dense he can limit his own liberal instincts. we are invited to live by our own instincts, never to rely on any on what cultural social norms of behavior to forget about ethics, which defines us as people and no future of this ideology, except for self-destruction, i think it simply cannot be , and therefore we should not be surprised today by what mrs. trass is talking about, and i even want touching on this issue is very important. we every time during the discussion. this is a very difficult question, because the historical fate of russia is very complicated. she , uh, in one hundred years has traveled a road that many other states have traveled in about 1,000, moreover, there were huge upheavals both social and political economic. but i think that we are birds, yes, but i think that even in our own history we can find the answer to the question,

what defines us, uh, the period when , for uh, 70 years in our state? uh, there was a marxist ideology. well, we know that even during the period of the island of confrontation itself, as a state, it was in danger of disappearing and destroying its population. uh, at that time the head of the soviet state, addressing the soviet people, he preferred to use those words that determined the thousand-year history of russia, they are these 20-30 years. i urge that we always, uh, position ourselves and know and are expected of us in any country, if you talk to people who are critical of what is happening in the state. they expect from russia that russia is a state that can give them back traditionalism, which can give them back the opportunity to be the same. who they are they turn into these sexless idle people who have no value, no

parents, no origin of anything. i absolutely agree that this is what we can offer and what people will become for, and i would like to return to what alexander said about germany, after all, there is a very interesting trick of the germans. they say, so uh, you accuse us, that here we are sending weapons against the russians, whom we killed in the forties, but listen, we also fought with the ukrainians and, in percentage terms, the wermach killed most of the ukrainian population. yes there means 10% or 20 30 than the population of the russian federation means this conclusion was made this summer. so we are more to blame before the ukrainians than before the russians. it means that we are obliged to send them weapons. they say this in all seriousness, yes, after steinmar's speech on june 22, no, i