I think this is the best piece of writing I've seen so far today (it's only 10AM),
and more worthy of reading than any thoughts currently rattling around the
geriatric asylum in my cranium.
Ok, so don't deem your own answers to your very own two questions and of mine
to be worthy of reading or your "thoughts currently rattling around the geriatric
asylum" in your own "cranium"?
Ok, if you do think and do say so.
Jimmy Marr wrote:
See what you think.
Russian secret weapon – traditional Western peoples
29.04.2015
by Guy Somerset
In recent days I have frequently wondered in what condition the world would be
if there were a Christian equivalent of Al-Qaeda. .....
I do think that Guy Somersets presumption that "Civilization" is based upon
a Russian Orthodox Christianity and against any "anti-Civilization" is absurd.
Christianity is as much Jewish-controlled as are the mass media and are all
the same "cabals" ruling in Washington D.C. , London, Tel Aviv, and major
capitals in Europe and even in Moscow. Such Jewish Criminal gangs are all
"anti-White" and thus all of these are actually "anti-Civilization", thereby.
Putin is a smart politician and is an ex-KGB Chief and I would not trust his
words verses his actual actions. He is no real friend of White Nationalism.
He doesn't like having another "gang" encroach upon "his own territory" or
"turf". That doesn't mean he is for White survival and advancement but is
only for his own personal political power and own control all within Russia.
Personally I think there needs to be some new channels of communication between
White Americans and White Russians. and cut all the Jews and non whites out of the
picture somehow.
Agreed.
No more brothers wars -and all only for the Jews
and all of the non-Whites benefit!
Cosmotheist wrote:
Ok, so don't deem your own answers to your very own two questions and of mine
to be worthy of reading or your "thoughts currently rattling around the geriatric
asylum" in your own "cranium"?
Ok, if you do think and do say so.
lol
Jimmy Marr wrote:
See what you think.
Russian secret weapon – traditional Western peoples
29.04.2015
by Guy Somerset
In recent days I have frequently wondered in what condition the world would be
if there were a Christian equivalent of Al-Qaeda. .....
I do think that Guy Somersets presumption that "Civilization" is based upon
a Russian Orthodox Christianity and against any "anti-Civilization" is absurd.
Christianity is as much Jewish-controlled as are the mass media and are all
the same "cabals" ruling in Washington D.C. , London, Tel Aviv, and major
capitals in Europe and even in Moscow. Such Jewish Criminal gangs are all
"anti-White" and thus all of these are actually "anti-Civilization", thereby.
Putin is a smart politician and is an ex-KGB Chief and I would not trust his
words verses his actual actions. He is no real friend of White Nationalism.
He doesn't like having another "gang" encroach upon "his own territory" or
"turf". That doesn't mean he is for White survival and advancement but is
only for his own personal political power and own control all within Russia.
Best regards,
Cosmotheist
I agree, If Guy Somerset is trying to say that America should not fight Russia because they are more Christian than us then what he is saying is pretty absurd. We shouldn't fight a war with Russia because it doesn't serve any of our interests, and we cannot afford anymore Brother's war that only benefit Jews, whether it's some Jewish tribal chief in Israel or some Oligarch living on a pedophile Island somewhere. Just because Russia seems to be embracing Christianity right now doesn't really impress me that much. It might look better to embrace Christianity than Homosexuality, like America is doing, but in the end Christianity can probably be just as dangerous. Plus I don't know how much Putin cares about anything other than his own political career. He hasn't made any nationalistic proclamations as far as I know, although I am no Putin expert. I would say he is doing an okay job of fending of an aggressive America, but certainly any Russian in a similar position would probably be smart enough to make the same decisions that Putin is making if not better ones. If Putin is a not a White Nationalist then he is not going to be of much help to us in the long run, but I suppose anything that he does now which benefits whites makes him a better statesman than any of our politicians in America.
DanielOlj79 wrote:
i don't know if I would hold such regard for Putin. He probably is wise enough not to be baited into a war with America right now, but I don't know what his motives are. I watched this video on Youtube:
He has some pretty harsh things to say America and not just of the America of today but of America since it's inception, and perhaps before when it was still Colonists from Western Europe. He charges America with Genocide of the native populations of the likes which the world has never witnessed. Then he lambastes America for it's enslavement of Blacks and it's mistreatment of Black people over the course of the last 400 years, and even up until today when men like Joe Louis? (Some popular black athlete who had to live in a prejudiced society) had to live their lives in a country where they were treated as if they weren't equals to the real citizens. I don't know if Putin is trying to make more of an appeal to Blacks and other non-white Americans then he is to White Americans.
I enjoyed the video. Thanks for posting it. When thinking about the motivations behind Putin's public statements I'd like to have a better understanding of Dugin's book Foundations of Geopolitics. I'm not sure if it is available in English. The Wiki description includes this:
Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S.
That probably explains Putin's motivation for fueling anti-White sentiments with his rhetoric. According to John Dunlop, there's strong racial undercurrent to Dugin's work :
During the early 1990s, Dugin founded his own publishing house, "Arktogeya." This name was
borrowed from the publishing house of German racist writer Guido von List (1848-1918). It combines
the ancient Greek words arktos (north) and gea or gaia (land), a reference to the vanished polar
continent that was supposedly the original home of the Aryans.
The new organization appears to have been more influenced by German
than by Russian national Bolshevism. The German National Bolshevik Ernst Niekisch had "advocated a
German-Russian alliance against the West. In the Soviet Union, especially Stalin's Soviet Union, many
German nationalists [like Niekisch] saw the logical fulfillment of the war against 'Jewish capitalism.'"
Whereas in his 1993 book, Konspiralogiya, Dugin had criticized the secret police for perceived "Atlanticist," that is, pro-American
and pro-British sympathies, he now toasted the KGB (the initials he preferred to FSB) as "a new caste,
a new social stratum"
Our new chief stratum are incapable of ruling under such a democracy.... They stand in need of an
attractive foundation for another, non-democratic model. Here Eurasianism extraordinarily fits the bill.
It offers the following: an authoritarian-charismatic (autocratic) model; selfless and ascetical serving
of the regime as the highest form of valor (the messianic great power syndrome); the agreement of
ethnic and religious minorities to play a subordinate role; and imperial xenophobia. 41
"What induces the regime to seek a new ideology in Eurasianism?" journalist Dmitrii Radyshevskii,
asked. He answered: "Here [in Dugin-style Eurasianism] there are ideas which meet the psychological
needs of society: there is an alternative to the failed love affair with the West; there is the [Russian]
tradition of messianism; and there is the proximity of Asia.... The regime stands in need of a new
ideology, but of a traditional one, 'integral and great.' All of this is happily combined in Eurasianism."
Drawing on the extensive twentieth-century literature on geopolitics--and especially on the interwar
German school of Karl Haushofer--Dugin posits a primordial, dualistic conflict between "Atlanticism"
(seafaring states and civilizations, such as the United States and Britain) and "Eurasianism" (land-
based states and civilizations, such as Eurasia-Russia). 43 As Wayne Allensworth noted, once one
penetrates below the surface of Dugin's seemingly rational and scholarly language in Foundations of
Geopolitics, one realizes that "Dugin's geopolitics are mystical and occult in nature, the shape of world
civilizations and the clashing vectors of historical development being portrayed as shaped by unseen
spiritual forces beyond man's comprehension."
Dugin insists, for the "total churchification" of Russians, for the Russian nation to become viewed
simply as "the Church" (255-256). Such an emphasis, he believes, should--together with a persistent
focus on the glorious past and bright future of the Russian nation--help bring about the "demographic
upsurge" so desperately needed by Russians today. Economic incentives by themselves will prove
insufficient to promote such an upsurge (256-257). One "radical" slogan, Dugin concludes, must be
consistently put forward: "The nation is everything; the individual is nothing" (257). This slogan
encapsulates one of Dugin's most cherished beliefs.
Remember Putin's reference to Hiroshima?
The anti-Americanism of the Japanese, "who remember well the nuclear
genocide and the disgrace of political occupation," must be unleashed, as well as the fervent anti-
Americanism of fundamentalist Muslim Iranians (234, 241). On a global scale, Dugin declares, "the
main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S." (248).
And his reference to slavery?
... it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists
Dugin's program focuses on the formation of three key axes:
Moscow-Berlin, Moscow-Tokyo, and Moscow-Teheran. With regard to the future of Europe, Dugin
writes: "The task of Moscow is to tear Europe away from the control of the U.S. (NATO), to assist
European unification, and to strengthen ties with Central Europe under the aegis of the fundamental
external axis Moscow-Berlin. Eurasia needs a united, friendly Europe" (369). In advocating this path,
Dugin appears to be influenced by the writings of the European New Right
Dugin notes that another important ally of Eurasia-Russia will be India, which, like Japan, will be
invited to join Russia in efforts to contain and perhaps dismember China.
"On the whole," he continues, "the entire Islamic zone represents a
naturally friendly geopolitical reality in relation to the Eurasian Empire, since the Islamic tradition ...
fully understands the spiritual incompatibility of America and religion. The Atlanticists themselves see
the Islamic world, on the whole, as their potential opponent"
The extensive stretch of territory lying to the south of the Russian Federation is to be divvied up with
a future Iranian Empire and with Armenia as well. "A special geopolitical role," Dugin writes, "is played
by Armenia, which is a traditional and reliable ally of Russia in the Caucasus. Armenia will serve as a
most important strategic base in the thwarting of Turkish aggression to the north and to the east." It
is necessary, therefore to create "the [subsidiary] axis Moscow-Erevan-Teheran" (352). "The
Armenians," Dugin underscores with approval, "are an Aryan people ... [like] the Iranians and the
Kurds" (243).
Last edited by Jimmy Marr on Tue May 05, 2015 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Added link to Dugin's book Foundations of Geopolitics
Jimmy Marr wrote:Christianity is a judaized meth-whore whose unique trick it was to free-base jusurious currencies.
Who gives a whit if her principles were universal? Did she apply them universally, or dispense exemptions to every form of inferiority that could crawl out from under a goddamned rock?
Yeah I agree with you, the church is bad indeed, but not all of the followers of Christianity are bad people in my opinion. They have simply been misled. Even Jesus himself may not have been a bad guy (if he even existed), but the people who used his name to make a religion out of him perverted his message to enslave the sheepish people and the religion has been destroying our race for 2,000 years.
*I edited my OP and removed the first paragraph from that excerpt to make it a bit shorter. The two paragraphs left are enough to explain why Christianity is the enemy of our race.
The reason I posted this is because there are other pro-white groups who either tolerate Christianity, or even insist on keeping the Christian faith as a tenet of their ideology. I think the groups that tolerate Christianity do it simply because they don't want to offend or alienate White Christians who may be sympathetic to their cause, and who may donate financially. The groups that tolerate Christianity within their organizations for those reasons are being a bit unethical and dishonest in my opinion. The other groups that want to merge Christianity with White racialism are pretty much insane in my opinion. I think their motive is more of a fear of eternal punishment in Hell if they renounce their Christian faith. I believe there is no place for such superstitious mentalities in this struggle other than to weed out the less fit elements who may be in our ranks. The National Alliance is special in my opinion and is the Vanguard of all pro-white groups because they outright state that Christianity is an opposed ideology, and rather than take the easy way and compromise with devout Christians for short term monetary gain or for a short term increase in membership numbers, the NA has taken the correct path by stating outright that Christianity is an opposed ideology and although this may hurt the organization in the short run, it will be to our advantage in the long run when the other movements fail. The group that is competing for control of the National Alliance is actually another perverted group of people who edited the original NA handbook that Dr. Pierce produced and removed the section that classified Christianity as an opposed ideology. Their motivation in doing that was most likely to attract larger numbers to their group and thus gain larger financial support and also because some of the leaders of that splinter group identify with Christianity themselves. This would not be tolerated by Dr. Pierce if he were alive today. It is a recipe for failure to embrace Christianity. That doesn't mean Christians should not be allowed to join the Alliance, but they would have to put their Christian faith aside if it causes them to come into conflict with any National Alliance policy.
You'll appreciate my commentary in the April BULLETIN, Daniel. I'm addressing what you have written above and emphasize our Alliance's policy on associating with these "movement" groups. It will be postmarked tomorrow so you should have it by Monday, maybe even Saturday.
Hey Will, I got the bulletin today, thanks. I hope you don't mind if I reprint a small section of the bulletin here, which was a reprinted quote from Dr. Pierce in a January 2002 NA Bulletin:
A member who disagrees with this rather dim view of the "movement" should choose a "movement" organization and join it, or he should start his own organization, but he should resign his membership of the Alliance
I believe I heard this statement from Dr. Pierce before, but I thought it was in one of his ADV broadcasts. I was browsing through some of the old Dr. Pierce ADV texts but couldn't find that statement anywhere. I guess I know now it was in a Bulletin and not in an ADV broadcast. Anyway that statement perfectly sums up why I started this thread in the first place. Since it was written while the original membership handbook was around, there wasn't much room for debate over the Christianity question. Christian members were accepted into the Alliance but if their religious views caused them to come into conflict with the views of the Alliance, then they were encouraged to resign. I think it's also important to point out that since this quote which according to this current April 2015 bulletin was printed in the January 2002 NA bulletin, it then over-rules the common argument that NARRG uses over Dr. Pierce's alleged abandonment of the Cosmotheist world view. That is the argument which they derived from of an ADV Broadcast he made in 1997 titled "On Churchgoers". While Dr. Pierce's comments in that broadcast still hold true, they don't imply that Dr. Pierce ever abandoned Cosmotheism, or that he changed his mind on Christianity being an opposed ideology. Narrg is misinterpreting Pierce's words from that ADV to suit their purposes of turning the NA (or their future version of the NA) into a Christian organization. If Dr. Pierce changed his mind in regards to that policy then he would have edited his membership handbook which was published in 1993 that listed Christianity as an opposed ideology.
PS. I noticed that you enlarged the text in my OP when you quoted me in regards to the NA's position on Christianity. That was the part I though most important myself because it is what makes the NA unique, so I'm glad that you picked up on that.
DanielOlj79 wrote:
i don't know if I would hold such regard for Putin. He probably is wise enough not to be baited into a war with America right now, but I don't know what his motives are. I watched this video on Youtube:
He has some pretty harsh things to say America and not just of the America of today but of America since it's inception, and perhaps before when it was still Colonists from Western Europe. He charges America with Genocide of the native populations of the likes which the world has never witnessed. Then he lambastes America for it's enslavement of Blacks and it's mistreatment of Black people over the course of the last 400 years, and even up until today when men like Joe Louis? (Some popular black athlete who had to live in a prejudiced society) had to live their lives in a country where they were treated as if they weren't equals to the real citizens. I don't know if Putin is trying to make more of an appeal to Blacks and other non-white Americans then he is to White Americans.
I enjoyed the video. Thanks for posting it. When thinking about the motivations behind Putin's public statements I'd like to have a better understanding of Dugin's book Foundations of Geopolitics. I'm not sure if it is available in English. The Wiki description includes this:
Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S.
That probably explains Putin's motivation for fueling anti-White sentiments with his rhetoric. According to John Dunlop, there's strong racial undercurrent to Dugin's work :
During the early 1990s, Dugin founded his own publishing house, "Arktogeya." This name was
borrowed from the publishing house of German racist writer Guido von List (1848-1918). It combines
the ancient Greek words arktos (north) and gea or gaia (land), a reference to the vanished polar
continent that was supposedly the original home of the Aryans.
The new organization appears to have been more influenced by German
than by Russian national Bolshevism. The German National Bolshevik Ernst Niekisch had "advocated a
German-Russian alliance against the West. In the Soviet Union, especially Stalin's Soviet Union, many
German nationalists [like Niekisch] saw the logical fulfillment of the war against 'Jewish capitalism.'"
Whereas in his 1993 book, Konspiralogiya, Dugin had criticized the secret police for perceived "Atlanticist," that is, pro-American
and pro-British sympathies, he now toasted the KGB (the initials he preferred to FSB) as "a new caste,
a new social stratum"
Our new chief stratum are incapable of ruling under such a democracy.... They stand in need of an
attractive foundation for another, non-democratic model. Here Eurasianism extraordinarily fits the bill.
It offers the following: an authoritarian-charismatic (autocratic) model; selfless and ascetical serving
of the regime as the highest form of valor (the messianic great power syndrome); the agreement of
ethnic and religious minorities to play a subordinate role; and imperial xenophobia. 41
"What induces the regime to seek a new ideology in Eurasianism?" journalist Dmitrii Radyshevskii,
asked. He answered: "Here [in Dugin-style Eurasianism] there are ideas which meet the psychological
needs of society: there is an alternative to the failed love affair with the West; there is the [Russian]
tradition of messianism; and there is the proximity of Asia.... The regime stands in need of a new
ideology, but of a traditional one, 'integral and great.' All of this is happily combined in Eurasianism."
Drawing on the extensive twentieth-century literature on geopolitics--and especially on the interwar
German school of Karl Haushofer--Dugin posits a primordial, dualistic conflict between "Atlanticism"
(seafaring states and civilizations, such as the United States and Britain) and "Eurasianism" (land-
based states and civilizations, such as Eurasia-Russia). 43 As Wayne Allensworth noted, once one
penetrates below the surface of Dugin's seemingly rational and scholarly language in Foundations of
Geopolitics, one realizes that "Dugin's geopolitics are mystical and occult in nature, the shape of world
civilizations and the clashing vectors of historical development being portrayed as shaped by unseen
spiritual forces beyond man's comprehension."
Dugin insists, for the "total churchification" of Russians, for the Russian nation to become viewed
simply as "the Church" (255-256). Such an emphasis, he believes, should--together with a persistent
focus on the glorious past and bright future of the Russian nation--help bring about the "demographic
upsurge" so desperately needed by Russians today. Economic incentives by themselves will prove
insufficient to promote such an upsurge (256-257). One "radical" slogan, Dugin concludes, must be
consistently put forward: "The nation is everything; the individual is nothing" (257). This slogan
encapsulates one of Dugin's most cherished beliefs.
Remember Putin's reference to Hiroshima?
The anti-Americanism of the Japanese, "who remember well the nuclear
genocide and the disgrace of political occupation," must be unleashed, as well as the fervent anti-
Americanism of fundamentalist Muslim Iranians (234, 241). On a global scale, Dugin declares, "the
main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S." (248).
And his reference to slavery?
... it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists
Dugin's program focuses on the formation of three key axes:
Moscow-Berlin, Moscow-Tokyo, and Moscow-Teheran. With regard to the future of Europe, Dugin
writes: "The task of Moscow is to tear Europe away from the control of the U.S. (NATO), to assist
European unification, and to strengthen ties with Central Europe under the aegis of the fundamental
external axis Moscow-Berlin. Eurasia needs a united, friendly Europe" (369). In advocating this path,
Dugin appears to be influenced by the writings of the European New Right
Dugin notes that another important ally of Eurasia-Russia will be India, which, like Japan, will be
invited to join Russia in efforts to contain and perhaps dismember China.
"On the whole," he continues, "the entire Islamic zone represents a
naturally friendly geopolitical reality in relation to the Eurasian Empire, since the Islamic tradition ...
fully understands the spiritual incompatibility of America and religion. The Atlanticists themselves see
the Islamic world, on the whole, as their potential opponent"
The extensive stretch of territory lying to the south of the Russian Federation is to be divvied up with
a future Iranian Empire and with Armenia as well. "A special geopolitical role," Dugin writes, "is played
by Armenia, which is a traditional and reliable ally of Russia in the Caucasus. Armenia will serve as a
most important strategic base in the thwarting of Turkish aggression to the north and to the east." It
is necessary, therefore to create "the [subsidiary] axis Moscow-Erevan-Teheran" (352). "The
Armenians," Dugin underscores with approval, "are an Aryan people ... [like] the Iranians and the
Kurds" (243).
I'm not very familiar with Dugin, I heard he was detained in Hungary during the last Amren Conference though. Oh and to correct myself Putin mentioned Colin Powell's Memoirs in that video, not Joe Luis (bad memory on my part). I don't blame Putin for attacking America verbally the way he did, it's pretty understandable considering how the U.S. has been treating Russia lately. I wonder where the hearts of Western European people lie in this new cold war between America and Russia? I think form a logistical stand point it would make more sense for them to seek a stronger relationship with Russia than the United States (that's assuming they have the freedom to make that decision). I guess my personal view right now is that Russia is more independent from Jewish control than America is so they would be the lesser of two evils. But I think you get mixed response in this difficult topic when you talk to someone from Western Europe. Some people think that Russia has a secret plan to conquer all of Europe, and perhaps the world if they can manage Europe. I don't personally think that is so, that is probably the effects of western propaganda talking. I think Dugin is right though about using any basis to cause separation in a country if you are trying to destabilize it. But it's dishonest to act like you care about African Americans when I'm sure he could really care less. That's politics I guess. By the way I think if Stalin would have gotten the bomb first he might have used it on Japan instead of the U.S. as a show of force.
I think Dugin is right though about using any basis to cause separation in a country if you are trying to destabilize it. But it's dishonest to act like you care about African Americans when I'm sure he could really care less. That's politics I guess. By the way I think if Stalin would have gotten the bomb first he might have used it on Japan instead of the U.S. as a show of force.
Yes, agreed, and that very strategy of "using any basis to cause separation in a country
if you are trying to destabilize it" is exactly what our own CIA and what the British MI6
has all been doing in Russia and in all of Russia's formerly-controlled republics. Putin is
just playing the same game in return as payback, although, not nearly as effectively as
of yet.
Yes, he would have (Stalin) used it as a show of force as well and if he had gotten the
atomic bomb first. Especially, if on Germany, but, Japan would do the job as well.
I was reading this morning to see what I could learn about Byzantine Christianity, which wasn't much, but I did stumble on a tidbit of information that makes me suspect it can't be all bad:
The final Byzantine instrument, the bagpipes, known as Dankiyo (from ancient Greek: angion (Τὸ ἀγγεῖον) "the container"), had been played even in Roman times. Dio Chrysostom wrote in the 1st century of a contemporary sovereign (possibly Nero) who could play a pipe (tibia, Roman reedpipes similar to Greek aulos) with his mouth as well as by tucking a bladder beneath his armpit.[197] The bagpipes continued to be played throughout the empire's former realms through to the present. (See Balkan Gaida, Greek Tsampouna, Pontic Tulum, Cretan Askomandoura, Armenian Parkapzuk, and Romanian Cimpoi.)
I also discovered that I'm not alone in this suspicion:
Jimmy Marr wrote:I was reading this morning to see what I could learn about Byzantine Christianity,
which wasn't much, but I did stumble on a tidbit of information that makes me suspect it can't be all bad:
The final Byzantine instrument, the bagpipes, known as Dankiyo (from ancient Greek: angion (Τὸ ἀγγεῖον) "the container"), had been played even in Roman times. Dio Chrysostom wrote in the 1st century of a contemporary sovereign (possibly Nero) who could play a pipe (tibia, Roman reedpipes similar to Greek aulos) with his mouth as well as by tucking a bladder beneath his armpit.[197] The bagpipes continued to be played throughout the empire's former realms through to the present. (See Balkan Gaida, Greek Tsampouna, Pontic Tulum, Cretan Askomandoura, Armenian Parkapzuk, and Romanian Cimpoi.)
Nah. Keep the bagpipes, which were originally ancient Roman/Greek instruments,
and "bag" the Byzantine Christianity, and of which is just as much a real enemy of
any Higher Man than is any other version or variation of it.
I also discovered that I'm not alone in this suspicion:
Actually, what this Muslim is talking about is only a "second conquest" of Rome,
[ie. The Eastern Roman Empire, or The Byzantine Empire and its capital named
Constantinople, after its founding Emperor, and of which is now called Istanbul,
after the 1st Muslim conquest] in a "prophecy" that was all really only after the
fact, as usual.
All prophecy nonsense aside, he is quite correct that a radical Muslim take-over
in Turkey, of which controls those straits, would be a strategic coup for Russian
interests, and especially if Russia were actually allied all with those same radical
Muslims against the US, NATO, and the West and of course, Israel.
This is a natural result of "American" foreign policy being controlled
by the Usual Suspects, and against the best interests of America or
even against all Whites Worldwide or as a Whole. This is a fact and
it must be addressed by all Whites all Worldwide as a Whole as well.
Cosmotheist wrote:
All prophecy nonsense aside, he is quite correct that a radical Muslim take-over
in Turkey, of which controls those straits, would be a strategic coup for Russian
interests, and especially if Russia were actually allied all with those same radical
Muslims against the US, NATO, and the West and of course, Israel.
I would think the chances of an Islamic/Eastern Orthodox alliance in Turkey would be proportional to the balance of power between the Sunni and Shia within Turkey. According to Wiki, only 25% of Turkey's Muslims are Shia, so I'm not holding my breath.
I wouldn't be surprised if the House of Saud isn't as genetically jewed as Anglo-Saxon royalty.
