banner
Jun 18, 2022
0 Views
0 0

Someone in the top leadership of the country is preparing the defeat of Russia in the NWO?

In the photo: political scientist Oleg Matveychev

In the photo: political scientist Oleg Matveychev (Photo: Artem Geodakyan / TASS)

One of the reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union was the ban on KGB agencies to carry out intelligence and operational work to identify enemies of the state in party and Soviet bodies – not only among cadre employees, but also among deputies at various levels. I speak about this as a person who personally participated in this work.

Now, looking from the outside, I can’t get rid of the impression that the same mistake (or crime, whatever you like), leading to the destruction of the already Russian state, is being committed now.

I suggest everyone to review the TV show “Evening with Vladimir Solovyov» dated 15 June. Deputy of the State Duma, invited as an expert, speaks Oleg Matveychev.

By the way, the selection of experts for this, one of the highest rated programs on state television, cannot but raise questions. What is worth, for example, hoisting the crown of “Americanist political scientist”, “specialist in American foreign and domestic policy”, almost “the main Americanist of the era” on the head of a person who has no education not only in the field of American studies, but who has not even received humanitarian education – historical or political science. The physics department of Moscow State University, of course, provides a decent education, but where is American studies, and even to consider it one’s specialization. There is no reason to consider yourself a specialist and work in a printing company. As well as the management of the company for the sale of (cardboard?) Packaging.

And when this “expert” puffs up to say something “American”, or to sparkle with his “knowledge” of American realities, it would be better if he did not do this. Of course, somewhere in Berdychiv a “shotgun” can pass for a sawn-off shotgun, but anyone familiar with life in the USA knows that a “shotgun” is just a shotgun. And when it becomes a “shotgun”, they call it “sawn-off” or “sawed-off” (and, in this case, adding the word “shotgun” is not required at all – as in Russian).

But maybe that “expert” lived for a long time in the States or Canada, where he gained practical knowledge about these countries? So no. It wasn’t.

But back to Matveychev. This list from EdRa, after a couple of minutes of outpouring thoughts about the supposed plans of the enemy regarding the NMD in Ukraine (I wonder who in the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon or Langley told them to him?), Every now and then, calling us “Americans”, he began state the plans of the enemies in relation to the NWO.

And it would be nice if he stopped simply at the presentation of the plans of the enemy. It must be understood that when it is recognized that the entire NATO bloc is waging an all-out hybrid war against Russia, the mere presentation of the proposals of the opposing side is propaganda aimed at undermining morale. A striking example: the Istanbul incident Medinsky.

But Matveychev goes further. Casting a shadow on a clear day with arguments about Ukrainian refugees, the economic crisis in the West, he broadcasts that we will be offered “something like“ Minsk-3 ”, in which those territories that have already been liberated remain behind Russia, plus a certain demilitarized zone and guarantees that they do not join NATO and something else there … which, in fact, was, like, required there … demilitarized zones around the Russian border, so that they don’t shoot, so that in Donetsk … and this layer will allow you to talk later, while “saving face”, then we stopped the aggressor, that we won. That we have preserved the statehood of Ukraine, that from their point of view (West, – “SP”), solves the problem locally…”

At this moment, Solovyov, in his age-old manner of showing loyal feelings to the powers that be, says: “But here appears Dmitry Anatolievich Medvedev. Who says: what kind of payment do you want in two years? This move could be considered strong if Medvedev’s Twitter speeches are taken at face value and one does not remember the surrender of the Barents Sea to the Norwegians, forget about his position on Libya and much more.

I don’t know whether Solovyov knew about it or not, but in 2006 Matveychev worked as a consultant, adviser in the internal policy department of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation – in the administration at that time of President Medvedev. And in 2008, Matveychev worked in the campaign headquarters of Dmitry Medvedev.

But Solovyov’s allusion to Medvedev and his reminiscences about pressure Biden in 2011 on Putin – so that Putin would not go to the polls in 2012, leaving Medvedev, who looked to them, to steer, – they did not have a stopping effect on Matveychev.

Matveychev carried: “Even if you imagine that you managed to persuade Zelensky – although it will be a difficult story … Let’s imagine that we succeeded somehow, but naturally, not within the borders that we are talking about now, on which the army is now located … we managed to persuade Russia … Well, within what borders, for example? In any case, Donetsk and Luhansk should definitely be demilitarized, there is no turning back from this… Plus the territories that exist… Plus something else.”

And then Matveychev wondered on whose side after such a “decision” the “scales of history” would fall.

Solovyov enters: “If we do not reach Transnistria, then the wheels of history will pass through our bones.”

Matveychev insists: “This is temporary.”

Solovyov somehow very calmly calls it “Khasavyurt”. He is unintelligible and almost inaudibly echoed by the general and deputy of the State Duma Andrey Gurulev.

Matveychev, in a kind of muzhikish tricky manner, does not let up: “We are not talking about the fact that someone fixed it like that, and something was left on it.” So he was talking about something like that? With whom? What did you agree on?

The new Ostap carries on: “Everyone understands perfectly well that no Minsk-3 will be carried out … they signed something with them, but they take it and violate it … on whose side is time?”

Then there was a dialogue between Solovyov and Matveychev in the spirit of which of them is true to the instructions of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

But quite recently, in the same studio, it was Matveychev, in the spirit of “dragging and not letting go,” who advocated that no one dare to open his mouth about the lack of drones, thermal imagers and other means of warfare in the troops. After all, this, understand-a-ash, casts a shadow on the genius of everything planned. And there should be no doubt!

But Solovyov contradicted him, arguing that shortcomings must be identified in order for the excellent to become even better.

What is the point of Matveychev’s statements now? Isn’t it clear that if you leave the Ukrainian state even for one square kilometer, then there will be NATO nuclear missiles? That any promises of Ukraine and the West will be violated at the slightest suitable occasion? Little did they deceive Putin?

In my opinion, Matveychev is a figurehead. A sort of Berlaga, who is “launched” by puppeteers who make up pre-election lists. “Kublo” defeatists and traitors must be sought there.

And so that they don’t have a place to turn around, the Supreme Commander is obliged to clearly and unambiguously define: what is the “defense of Donbass” (is it now carried out?), what are his directives regarding “denazification” and “demilitarization”, how he intends to punish the Nazis, is he interfering now West into our NVO, and what punishment will those who strike at settlements on our land, land that should be sacred and inviolable, suffer?

Article Categories:
Politics
banner

Leave a Reply