VT: Vladimir Putin morally and intellectually humiliates Satanist Masha Gessen again

[James]

Vladimir Putin morally and intellectually humiliates Satanist Masha Gessen again

By Jonas E. Alexis on December 17, 2016

New World Order agents and Satanists are doing Putin a big favor by upholding patently incoherent ideas. This was one reason why Putin told BBC journalist John Simpson, “Have you any common sense at all?”

“Double standards only make sense when I and my brethren use them. If another entity does use them, it is wrong. plain and simple.”

 

…by Jonas E. Alexis

 

Jewish writer Masha Gessen wants to be a Tasmanian devil when it comes to attacking Vladimir Putin. She thinks she has all the facts that will outsmart Putin in a fair political fight. Taking the C.I.A. as her cue, she has recently reproduced the claim that Russia—and Vladimir Putin in particular—was involved in hacking into the DNC.

When Trump responded by saying that “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” Gessen declared, “But simple explanations, especially ones that assign blame to conspiracies and foreigners, threaten clear thinking.”[1]

Oh, boy. I simply could not hold my laughter here because we have been accused of obfuscating “truth” by positing “conspiratorial theories” about foreign policy and the Neoconservative ideology for years! Now Gessen is saying that invoking claims such as “conspiracy theories” is not a substitute for clear thinking.

If that is what Gessen truly believes, then we will show that Gessen is desperately attempting to attack Putin because she is following an essentially wicked ideology. She cannot evade the evidence by invoking “conspiracy theories” either.

Gessen repeatedly said that Putin was a member of “subversive groups” which had ties to the NKVD, but she never addressed the fact that Putin is no longer a KGB.[2] She could never address the fact that Putin is implicitly challenging Stalinism and Leninism, the actual ideologies of the old regime.

In fact, Putin made it very clear that the Soviet government was “80-85 percent Jewish” and was “guided by false ideological considerations,”[3] which ended up slaughtering innocent Jews and multiplied millions of peasants and other people.

Gessen can never address this issue rationally because that will destroy her ideological hermeneutics. And if we take her position seriously and follow it to its logical conclusion, then her entire critique of Vladimir Putin falls apart. For example, Irving Kristol bragged about being a Trotskyite in college.[4]

Kristol’s son, Bill, is on Fox News almost every week and continues to pursue Trotsky’s ideology all over the Middle East. Has Gressen come out and declared that Kristol ought not to be on Fox News because she is pursuing an essentially Trotskyite ideology?

But the central question is this: Is Gessen really concerned about the truth and following it all the way? No.

Well, it turns out that Gessen is a Jewish lesbian who helped founded the Pink Triangle Campaign and who has been described as “Russia’s leading LGB rights activist.” Gessen, who “holds both Russian and US citizenship,” has been covertly supporting subversive groups such as the Pussy Riot, which happened to follow Leon Trotsky in its ideology.

“So, you want to play double standards? Well, let’s see how this ideology plays out in the political arena.”

In her book Words Will Break Cement: The Passion of Pussy Riot, Gessen admits that “five couples had sex in the Biology of Museum and videotaped it. The action was called Fuck for the Heir Puppy Bear, a play on Dmitry Medvedev’s last name…”[5] The actual scene was literal pornography.

Gessen left Russia and settled in America, where she continues to propound her subversive ideology in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New Republic, New Statesman, Slate, Vanity Fair, and U.S. News & World Report.[6]

If you don’t think that Gessen is morally and intellectually corrupt, think again. She once posited the claim that “It’s a no brainer that gays have the right to marry.” In the very next sentence, she magically asserted: “I also think equally that the institution of marriage should not exist.”

So, which is it, Gessen?

We are being buried beneath an avalanche of contradictions here. If the institution of marriage should not exist, does the statement that people “should have the right to marry” make any sense at all? Why can’t Gessen come to her senses and realize that she needs to think twice about postulating one crazy statement after another?

READ MORE >>>>>