COMMENTARY: Mass-Migration Should Be Accepted By Western Nations UN Secretary General

Antonio Guterres is a hardcore communist following Agenda 21 pushing to destroy the human race as it was designed by Count Richard Von Coudenhove-Kalergi who in 1950 was the first recipient of the Charlemagne Prize. Kalergi believed that the Jews were the spiritual elite of the world and viewed the white European race as “the cancer of human history” and a race that needed to be bred out of existence, forcing it to interbreed with darker races of Africa and Asia. He wrote a book titled «Praktischer Idealismus», where he describes, the citizens of the future “United States of Europe” not being people of the Old Continent, but a new mixed breed, product a widespread miscegenation. He proclaimed the need to abolish the nation’s right to self-determination and to break-up nation states using separatist movements, that would destroy them through mass migration. That is how they would be able to control Europe and it’s exactly what we are seeing happening today. United Nations is the seat of the New World Government and their actions are pushing for the Holocaust for Christianity and all Goys.


“Mass-Migration Should Be Accepted By Western Nations, UN Secretary-General,” Source:

UN member states should prepare for great migratory movements, said UN Secretary-General António Guterres on 11th of January 2018 during the presentation of the report on the management of migration processes. And this is not a joke: The UN, led by António Guterres, wants to manage and influence migration. All this, of course, is dressed up in pretty words about the need to provide humanitarian aid, and also justified by the benefits that resettlement of the population is to give to the economies of particular countries. However, in fact, this means only one thing: Europe and the entire Western World must prepare for the flood of Africans.

Currently, nearly 1,3 billion people live in Africa, and by the end of this century, there will be 350% more, or 4,4 billion.1) It is obvious that the continent, whose inhabitants are not able to feed themselves, let alone achieve an adequate level of urbanization and industrialization, cannot cope with such a sharp demographic increase. The UN, therefore, came up with the idea of resettling Africans to Europe and highly developed countries on other continents.

At the end of 2016, just after his election as UN Secretary-General, António Guterres said: “We must convince Europeans that migration is inevitable and that multiethnic and multireligious societies create wealth”.2) It can be assumed here that the goal set by the former UN commissioner for refugees (A. Gutters served this function from June to December 2015), is to promote migration, give it a legal framework and manage it globally.

The first major step towards formalization of this phenomenon was the creation of the “Making Migration Work for All” report, which says in no uncertain terms that nation-states are to cease to exist. The document says that migration would be beneficial to everyone. And it is beneficial… to migrants alone (who apart from being accommodated in apartments live on undeserved entitlements) rather than to the average European who has to work to make a living for himself and his family, pay for his home and, additionally, provide for millions of more newcomers.

The position expressed by Gutters during the presentation of this report makes our hair stand on end.3) The analysis of the speech of the UN secretary implies a simple conclusion: migration will still be bigger, we (UN) will manage it, and you (Western countries and societies) have to adapt:

„The fundamental challenge is to maximize the benefits of this orderly, productive form of migration while stamping out the abuses and prejudice that make life hell for a minority of migrants.”


„States need to strengthen the rule of law underpinning how they manage and protect migrants — for the benefit of their economies, their societies, and migrants themselves.”

The propaganda statement that migration brings social and economic benefits has become so deeply rooted in the media and political rhetoric that some people have begun to believe in it. It is a pity that these statements are not supported by any calculations or analyses.

„Migration is a positive global phenomenon. It powers economic growth, reduces inequalities, connects diverse societies and helps us ride the demographic waves of population growth and decline.”

According to a research4) conducted by the Hungarian Századvég foundation, mass migration is perceived by the citizens of all 28 European Union countries as a threat to the EU economy, the heritage of the member states and the presence of Third World aliens is believed to undermine security. The vast majority, as many as 68%, are afraid of the inflow of migrants from North Africa. For 70% of the inhabitants of the Old Continent, the growing number of Muslims is a serious threat, while only 8% say that this issue is not a problem. Citizens of European countries are afraid of increased crime and subsequent terrorist attacks. More than half of the pollies think that immigrants come to Europe mainly for economic reasons, that is, they are attracted by a high level of social benefits. 57% of respondents believe that the influx of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East will change the culture of their country, and 73% state that financial support for migrants will be a serious burden on state budgets. 61% believe that the influx of people from the Third World will weaken the EU economy.

Negative processes accompanying the resettlement of people were, however, completely ignored by the UN and transferred to countries which are not able to cope with this phenomenon:

„Migration (…), which powers economic growth, reduces inequalities, connects diverse societies (…) remains poorly managed.”


„The best way to end the stigma of illegality and abuse around migrants is, in fact, for Governments to put in place more legal pathways for migration.”

The report completely distorts the nature of threats to Western civilization, and also underestimates the importance of homogeneity, rejecting entirely the advantage that national states offer. The United Nations points out that shrinking populations is a danger for Europe, and Antonio Guterres suggests that the demographic collapse can be remedied by resettling the population surplus from Africa. By the end of this century, the number of indigenous Europeans will amount to fewer than a quarter of a billion, whereas there will be almost 4.4 billion Africans. The host society, according to the UN Secretary-General, has no right to think that migrations are a negative phenomenon:

„It can be seen, too, in the political impact of public perception that wrongly sees migration as out of control. The consequences include increased mistrust and policies aimed more at stopping than facilitating human movement.”

Also, the International Migration Organization, which participated in the work on this report, states on its Twitter account that „Migration is inevitable, desirable and necessary”.5) The question arises: who wants migration and who thinks it is necessary? Certainly not the inhabitants of the countries to which the alleged refugees are streaming.

The report states that:

  • migration is inevitable, therefore it must be properly organized and the UN provides guidance on how to manage it;
  • nation states must adapt to the admission of migrants in accordance with the guidelines;
  • the societies of developed countries must become accustomed to having their countries flooded with masses of migrants.

The powers that be are trying to convince us of the alleged benefits of mass migration and the resettlement of Africans into Europe. Reality contradicts wishful thinking. Increasingly, citizens of host countries are afraid to leave their homes not to mention that an increased part of their earnings, is used to provide for the newcomers. We have also come to the point where negation of positive aspects of migration is regarded as racism and xenophobia, and to the fact that if someone wants to live in a one-nation state, he is labeled as a nationalist, with the word being unjustifiably negatively charged.

A mass inflow of the so-called “refugees” on the Old Continent is not perceived by its inhabitants as a phenomenon that h culturally enriches and will also have a positive impact on the economy. However, global organizations do not take this into account and enforce their own plan to create a nationally and religiously heterogeneous society, where tradition and cultural identity are not desirable. António Guterres and the UN better know what is good for western nations, ignoring the data presented by many organizations, including the Gefira Foundation, which underlines a number of negative phenomena caused by the mass flooding of Europe by Third World populations.


COMMENTARY: Africa-Israel Summit ‘Justifies Colonialism, Apartheid’

Americans should LEARN from Palestinian activists who have what it takes to try to boycott this fake ‘diplomatic’ summit who’s intention is as criminal as its organizers. We know what the Jews want in Africa and it is not security or diplomacy, it is diamonds, oil, and other natural resources, continue expanding while carrying out ethnic cleansing. How long will it take for the rest of the world to stand up against these psychopathic serial killers? This is EXACTLY what we need to do, and that is to BOYCOTT all their schemes and stop them from furthering their evil plans. Please find ways of supporting these activists to boycott the summit. Spread the word! This is a war we will win if we stick together!


“Africa-Israel summit ‘justifies colonialism, apartheid’, Source:

According to activist Razan Zuayter, a campaign organiser based in Jordan, the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad is seeking to point out to African countries Israel’s “dangerous” activities in the continent, such as its diamond trade, often illegally imported from Africa as revealed in a 2009 United Nations report, and its mistreatment of African minorities in Israel.

“If it [the summit] happens, we want a counter movement to emerge in Africa that can act in parallel to it,” Zuayter told Al Jazeera.

The summit, scheduled for October 23, will have leaders from Africa and Israel discuss ways to enhance cooperation in the fields of technology, development, and security.

In a letter addressed to African governments and their respective embassies, the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad organization called for the boycott of the summit on the basis that establishing relations with an “apartheid state” and condoning its actions against the occupied Palestinian people comes in violation of various UN conventions.

“African countries which fought colonialism for decades and became free after a long suffering should never associate themselves with the only, longest and most brutal colonial project in the world today,” the letter reads. 

“In the name of justice and freedom and in the name of the African legacy of long struggle for freedom, we ask your country to disassociate from Israel’s Apartheid regime.”

Netanyahu previously pledged to strengthen ties with the continent and described his pledge as a “priority” at a regional security conference he attended in Liberia in June 2017.

“I believe in Africa, I believe in its potential- present and future. It is a continent on the rise,” he said in his address to West African leaders.

Historically, African leaders did not have warm relationships with the State of Israel. Following the 1973 October War, sub-Saharan African countries severed ties with Israel. In 2016, Netanyahu became the first Israeli leader to visit sub-Saharan Africa in almost three decades.

The organization, representing the Palestinian diaspora, is also working with civil society groups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on the ground to pressure participating governments into pulling out from the summit.

While these new friendships with Israel might bring certain African countries short-term benefits…they should beware of Israel’s longer-term agenda, which may ultimately be detrimental to their own national interests.

Ayesha Kajee, South African political analyst 

Salman Abu Sitta, Chairperson of the organization, told Al Jazeera that these African countries have been “hard, determined fighters” in the battle against western colonialism.

“It [the summit] is a very sad regression; it is regrettable that they deny that history and became enemies of their history…to become aligned with the very epitome of racism and discrimination that is Israel,” he said.

“Is Togo ready to send ships of slaves from Togo to Israel in annotation of their long history?” he added.

According to Abu Sitta, the main consequence of a renewed Africa-Israel relationship is losing what is now a “solid majority” in the UN General Assembly in favor of ending the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Traditionally, African nations have been supporters of the Palestinian cause when voting on resolutions concerning the right of return, the dismantlement of the Separation Wall, and ending the illegal settlement expansion project.

Out of 193 member states, there are 54 African states in the UN.

If we lose them [African votes], it is very dangerous,” Abu Sitta explained.

“Israel will have centres of influence in these countries, which will actively increase Israel’s influence in the UN and in the African continent,” he added, pointing out that the countries involved with organising the summit, including Togo, may have “private or monetary” motives for setting up the summit.

Al Jazeera reached out to the summit organizers for comment but received no reply in time for publication.

Similarly, Ghada Karmi, an academic and spokesperson for the organization, told Al Jazeera that the campaign is significant in encouraging a discussion about Israeli “apartheid” policies and in raising awareness.

Israel, Karmi said, is determined to carry out the summit to reverse or abolish the pro-Arab policy of the African states. If the summit were successful, it would be “a milestone in the Israeli campaign”, she explained.

“We have to ask what is Israel offering to the African countries – it seems to us that it is offering support for dictators,” she said, which would aid governments in repressing “liberation movements”. “This [campaign] should be done at the state level,” said Karmi, describing the lack of government action as problematic.

“We have been reaching out to states to condemn this summit, not only African governments.”

South African human rights activist and political analyst Ayesha Kajee, based in Johannesburg, told Al Jazeera that Israel has been on a mission to strengthen ties with Africa, even to the “extent of attempting to gain observer status at the African Union”.

“While these new friendships with Israel might bring certain African countries short-term benefits…they should beware of Israel’s longer-term agenda, which may ultimately be detrimental to their own national interests,” she said.

During Netanyahu’s visit to the continent in 2016, the Israeli government approved a $13m deal in development packages for African countries. The move was intended to symbolize the start of a closer economic relationship.

Speaking to Al Jazeera from the Occupied West Bank city of Ramallah, Mustafa Barghouti, the former Palestinian information minister and general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative political party, said that Israel is taking advantage of its technological abilities and of its military and security services to carry out the summit.

“We started seeing changing trends in the UN with regards to the Palestinian cause,” he said. “Loss of support could lead to dominance of the Israeli narrative about the Palestinian issue and about the situation today.”

In addition to utilising support from the United States to establish a base in African countries, Barghouti said that this relationship is a chance for Israel to “market” their products and surveillance services, especially at a time where the activities of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement are proving effective in curbing Israel’s economic success.

Naeem Jeenah, executive director of the Afro-Middle East Centre in Johannesburg, told Al Jazeera that a relationship with Israel would undermine African countries’ sovereignty.

Through marketing their products and services, Israel seeks to penetrate into the security services of these countries, Jeenah explained.

“It is a problem when a foreign state takes over the security functions of another government…they [African governments] become dependent on the Israelis,” he said.

Despite ongoing efforts to raise awareness, according to Jeenah, some 15 African countries are already in the “Israeli camp”, and no amount of civil society can reverse that.

African countries who oppose Israeli policies have not been vocal, he says, but with more government pressure, countries “on the fence…could be influenced”.

VIDEO: “Far-Right” Millennials Crowdfunded Ship to ‘Defend Europe’ from Migrants

Bravo for Defend Europe instead of talking on social media, AND ACTING INSTEAD!!! This should be an example for everyone fighting this Zionist plot — The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan.
And, why does Al-Jazeera call them “far-right,” exactly? These African migrants are mostly not real refugees, but in fact, economic migrants — the data speaks for itself. (((Mainstream media))) tells the masses the opposite however.
In addition, NGOs (led by Soros and even Israel) aid them and quite literally pick them up off the coast of Libya delivering them right to the Europe. Is this right? No, not at all. So, people who want to stop this madness of NGO’s smuggling are far-right?? 
And, the argument that Western countries invaded some African states centuries ago, and they are now obliged to destroy their civilization by bringing here the whole Africa and the Middle East is completely stupid. No European is responsible for something that was done from the colonial period.
buy soft Viagra
Aciphex No Prescription

Trump Putin

BOMBSHELL: The Dubious Friends Of Donald Trump

A fascinating documentary that proves once again the power of the tribe over the world. The problem here is not just Trump and his mafia ties, its the fact that the entire world is corrupted and there seems to be no way out. No politician anywhere in the world would be able to survive unless he is in someway or another tied up to the evil tribe. That is why one of the only solutions seems to be for us to boycott all banks and take away the tribe’s power over our money system.


COMMENTARY: The Wider Threat Still Overlooked – All Roads Lead To Communism…,

The South African Communist Party (SACP) was founded in 1921 and joined the International Socialist League. Socialism is always ‘the ideal solution’ to racial problems, which are scientifically created to get the people to later accept the communist ideology. Unfortunately, ignorance blinds people and they cannot see how they are being manipulated. 



President Jacob Zuma meets with Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan and Deputy Minister Mcebisi Jonas to discuss the final touches to Budget 2016. (Photo: GCIS)

“The wider threat still overlooked – all roads lead to Communism…,” Source:

With all that has happened over the past few days, it’s incredible to suggest that despite the threat to Treasury there is still a much wider and deeper problem. There are few with the insight that the Institute of Race Relations’ Anthea Jeffery holds, and what she unpacks in the piece below is most likely the final piece in the ANC’s jigsaw puzzle. And the key to her summation goes back to the 1950s when she says the ANC was in effect captured by the SACP, which also highlights why President Jacob Zuma went to them first with the news he wants to fire Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan. Jeffery says the end goal is to ultimately create a Communist state, and it’s all being achieved under the auspices of the National Democratic Revolution. Another brilliant piece of analysis. – Stuart Lowman

President Jacob Zuma’s peremptory recall of finance minister Pravin Gordhan from an investment roadshow in London shows how little Mr. Zuma cares about the economy or the plight of the poor.

The president is clearly reckless as to how much his vendetta against Mr Gordhan undermines the country’s growth prospects, pushes up the costs of servicing R2.2 trillion in public debt, or brings closer a ratings downgrade to junk status.

Yet South Africa’s growth prospects are already very poor. As Africa Confidential reports, South Africa is one of the slowest growing states on the African continent, with a projected growth rate in 2017 of 1.1% of GDP. This is far below the growth rates projected for Ethiopia (8.9%), Cote d’Ivoire (8.0%), Ghana (7.5%), Tanzania (7.1%), Senegal (6.8%), and Rwanda (6.0%).

Most South Africans are of course rational beings who find it difficult to believe that the government could deliberately undermine the economy and hurt the poor and disadvantaged. Mr. Zuma’s recent conduct shows that his faction of the ANC, at least, has no such concerns.

If the president can act so recklessly against Mr. Gordhan at so critical a moment for foreign investor confidence, then expropriation without compensation – whether supposedly ‘within’ the Constitution as now written, or following a constitutional amendment – cannot be ruled out.
The ANC has long downplayed this objective, for it knows that any open acknowledgment of this goal would greatly weaken its popular support. Most South Africans have no wish to adopt the flawed ideology and centralized controls that so signally failed in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe. Rather, they want to retain the political and economic freedoms that the ending of apartheid ushered in.

However, the real problem is much wider and deeper than what Mr. Zuma has done this week. Ever since it was captured by the SACP in the 1950s, the ANC has effectively been the junior partner in an alliance aimed at the gradual crippling of the capitalist economy in pursuit of a socialist and then communist order. This is being achieved under the rubric of the national democratic revolution (NDR), to which the ANC plans to recommit itself in December this year – and which the SACP openly describes as offering the ‘most direct’ path to communism.

To disguise their real goals, the ANC and its communist allies have long been masters of propaganda: the constant repetition of a narrative which includes key elements of truth that give it credibility, but which nevertheless profoundly distorts reality. This narrative shifts according to the needs of the time, but it always includes a careful choice of culprits to help deflect attention from the ANC’s own agency.

In the ten years (1984 to 1994) of the ANC’s people’s war against its black rivals, the key culprits in the narrative were initially Inkatha ‘warlords’ and ‘impis’ in KwaZulu/Natal and later a sinister ‘Third Force’ made up of Inkatha and the South African Police. Both Inkatha and the police were, of course, to blame for many of the killings in this period. However, the narrative was also utterly misleading in obscuring the ANC’s own major role in the deaths of some 20,500 black civilians.

Once the people’s war had brought the ANC to power in 1994, political violence came to an end and the narrative shifted once again. To increase the state’s control, weaken the economy, and prepare the way for ever more racial scapegoating, the narrative then targeted the commercial farming sector, the mines, the banks, the private health care sector, the supposedly white-owned media, and the many businesses (which despite the huge sums put into BEE and the practical obstacles to its success) had reportedly been dragging their feet on transformation.

Now that ANC/SACP policies have done so much to reduce growth, increase unemployment, and frustrate hopes of a better life for the poor, the ruling party is gearing up to fetter the economy still more firmly. It now wants ‘radical economic transformation’ to change the ‘structure’ of the economy. It is also seeking to push the BEE ownership requirement up from 25% to 51% and is increasingly echoing EFF calls for the nationalization of land and other assets.

Not surprisingly, the dominant narrative has now shifted once again. Its current targets have expanded from the specific sectors listed above to include racism, colonialism, and ‘white monopoly’ capitalism. Increasingly, these factors are identified as the key reasons for economic malaise and worsening destitution. Moreover, as so often in the past, there are many commentators outside the ANC who uncritically endorse and echo this narrative and seek to punish those who step outside its limits.

This narrative is helping to prepare the way for ever more state ownership and control. It is also damaging the economy in other ways, by raising racial tensions and eroding the social trust vital to investment. At the same time, it is calculated to play a particularly useful role in demonizing the DA and shoring up the ANC’s failing support in the run-up to the 2019 general election.

What Mr. Zuma has done in recalling Mr. Gordhan from London is so obviously damaging that many South Africans will rally to the finance minister’s defense. They might even persuade Mr. Zuma not to go ahead with his proposed cabinet reshuffle. But the wider threat to the country from the ANC/SACP alliance and its NDR objectives generates little opposition because it is still so little understood.

The current narrative is thus likely to continue unchecked. So too will the impetus towards the radical economic interventions which the narrative legitimates. In time, the weakening of property rights and increased racial scapegoating will help to marginalize or drive out the established middle class. This, in turn, will greatly weaken the new middle class. It will also (if all goes to plan) culminate in a proletarian dictatorship under the incontestable control of the ANC/SACP alliance. This, as the ANC coyly puts it in its draft Strategy & Tactics document for 2017, will help to usher in ‘a higher form of human civilization’.

  • Anthea Jeffery, Head of Policy Research, IRR. Jeffery is also the author of People’s War: New Light on the Struggle for South Africa and BEE: Helping or Hurting?

DOCUMENTARY: Who Brought The Slaves to America?

This documentary is inspired directly by the book, “Who Brought The Slaves To America” — profound, short, and to the point. Western textbooks, en masse, falsely proclaim Christians are only responsible for the enslavement of both the Native American Indians and the African Black people in the name of Jesus Christ.

The book “The Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews” revealed that Jews and not true Christians, were responsible for the enslavement of Blacks and American Native Americans. This documentary leaves no doubt of the Jewish involvement and control over the Atlantic slave trade.

The reason that Christianity has been falsely blamed for the enslavement of Blacks and Native Americans is based on the fact that Jewish Marranos proclaimed to be Christians outwardly and even used non-Jewish surnames to disguise their Jewish identities, when in reality, it was the Jews who caused much of the horror.

Jews were always in favor of the Slave Trade, after all they controlled great swathes of it. Freemasonry, which is a fundamentally Jewish institution, was a large part of the Slave trade. In fact, Albert Pike who was a 33rd degree Freemason and highly respected within Freemasonry, stirred excitement and verbal confrontations that help to start the civil war.

The South, also known as the Confederacy, was dominated by Jews, who vehemently supported the slavery of black people. The Jews rejected the North, which was led by the Colonists, where slavery was outlawed. The Colonists planned to separate from the British crown in favor of their independence.

The majority of the Colonists were Protestant and Catholic Christians, who were also known as the Abolitionists of both Europe and America. Christians fought very aggressively for the freedom of black slaves as documented by Jewish historians. The reason that the Jews rejected the deal from the North was that Jews were always loyal to the British and knew that under Colonist rule, slavery would have been outlawed in the South, which was majority Jewish. The Jews were not known for their military involvement, yet many fought in the civil war for the right to own slaves and not pay taxes.

Wicked lying men have purposely reversed and hidden the true history to attack the credibility of Christianity with lies, and to protect Jewish involvement in the Black and Native American slave trade.


COMMENTARY: Why Patriarch Kyrill Was Called “Tobacco Metropolitan”

It’s so easy to brainwash the sheeple when international media is ruled by the corrupt elite! Most of the world believes that Putin’s Russia is bringing back the solid values of the Christian Orthodox Church, what they don’t know is that its leader is a KGB agent and as corrupt as Putin. The day people decide to open their eyes to the truth it will already be too late. 

“Why Patriarch Kyrill was called “Tobacco Metropolitan”, Source:

Many Westerners know little about the new Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Father Kirill. Many Russians know him as a great orator and a host of a weekly TV show “Pastor’s Word.” However, very few know that Kirill (Vladimir Gundyaev by passport), a billionaire and a former KGB operative, made his fortune in tobacco, alcohol, and oil sales. His activities were among the main reasons why not-for-profits in Russia lost tax-deductible status. The new Orthodox leader is fond of playing with stocks, car racing, downhill skiing, and breeding exclusive kinds of dogs. He owns villas in Switzerland and a penthouse with a view of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow.
Kirill graduated with honors from Leningrad Spiritual Academy in 1969. In 1970, he earned his master’s degree, and after several minor positions was appointed a personal secretary to Mitropolit Nikodim, chief of the external church relations. Since that moment, Kirill became the face of the Orthodox Church in all foreign trips to Western Europe. According to website, Kirill’s colleagues and competitors linked all his travels to his work for the Soviet KGB where he was known by nickname “Mikhailov.” Starting in 1972, Kirill/Gundyaev/Mikhailov became more involved with the countries of the Middle East.
In 1975, at a forum in Nairobi, he defended the Soviet Union and downplayed dissidents’ letters by making historic claims that people of faith were not persecuted and there were no human rights abuses based on religion in the Soviet Union.
Kirill is progressive, speaks foreign languages, worked on the issues of unarming the USSR and the US, and advocated usage of the modern Russian language (instead of old Slavic) during the services. In 1991, the year the Soviet Union fell apart, he earned the title of Mitropolit. The new era of capitalism brought new achievements to Mitropolit Kirill’s life. In 1996, Kirill became a board member of bank “Peresvet” that is responsible for servicing the financial interests of the Russian Orthodox Church. The 1996 September issue (#34) of the Moscow News reports that Kirill, now for two years, had been organizing imports of highly taxable products, mostly tobacco, under the tax-exempt non-profit banner of the Orthodox Church. The claims were supported by other respectable news sources, including the Moskovsky Komsomolets.
The soon-to-be Patriarch confirmed the import of the highly unchristian products. By 1997, Kirill admitted the import of alcohol and tobacco, but claimed that the Russian Orthodox Church could not refuse the “humanitarian help.” The Russian Orthodox Church and Kirill’s private foundation “Nika” were not-for-profit organizations, and in 1996 alone they imported eight billion cigarettes to Russia. Kirill’s “church” business took off like a snowball, as the legal competitors could not compete with his low prices for tobacco and alcohol. The importers were naturally pushed off the market as they could not match Kirill’s prices after paying the necessary government dues.