Wednesday 23rd of January 2019

who the devil does he thinks he is?....

the devil soros...

European integration as a concept is impossible to argue with. However, the EU as it currently stands is clearly dysfunctional and out of sync with the needs of the vast majority of its citizens. It is being run in the interests of a neoliberal elite that consider national sovereignty and political stability anathema to the priority of being able to rake as much of a return from short-term investment as and where the opportunity arises. It is this perverse and grotesque interpretation of ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’ that has dominated the institutions of the EU, plunging them into crisis in the wake of the global economic crisis of 2007/08.

The result of the crisis within neoliberalism has been the growth of anti-politics – or to be more specific ‘anti-politics-as-usual’ – that was embodied in the decision of the British people to exit the EU (Brexit) in 2016, and in the election of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States later in the same year.

European integration without Russia is a political oxymoron. It is an oxymoron that has underpinned the EU in service, not to the economic or political needs of Europe’s citizens but instead in obeisance to the needs of Washington and the unipolar world that has obtained since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991. Thus we have European governments that have chosen to worship at the feet of Rome – i.e. Washington – with all of its consequences when it comes to peace and security while attacking Russia as the cause of those consequences when in truth it has been the biggest victim of them.

George Soros and everything he represents could never be part of the solution to the crisis within the EU. On the contrary, Soros is part of the problem. Until European governments recognize this, recognize that the failings of the EU are indistinguishable from the failings of neoliberalism; they are dealing with a crisis that will only deepen going forward.

Read more:


the devil is cashing in...

New York City Council members are demanding city taxpayers pay for defense attorneys for convicted criminal illegal aliens. The plan is reportedly being pushed by a foundation funded by billionaire George Soros.

Despite Mayor Bill de Blasio continuing his sanctuary city and open border policies, the Soros-linked group and city council members do not believe his plan does enough. Under de Blasio’s current plan, he is providing illegal aliens with more than $16 million of taxpayer money to pay for their lawyers, according to a New York Times article.

Approximately 27 of 51 city council members have sent a letter to de Blasio, asking him to follow the Soros-linked model provided by New York Immigrant Family Unity Project. The plan mandates that even convicted criminal illegal aliens receive taxpayer-funded attorneys.

“We want to step away from rhetoric that one person is more deserving than another in representation,” pro-sanctuary city Councilman Carlos Menchaca told the New York Times in an interview.

By not giving taxpayer-funded lawyers to convicted criminal illegal aliens, as the Soros group has modeled, the council members say de Blasio is practicing “exclusion.”

“We are concerned that the exclusion you propose will not only undermine our city’s commitment to due process for all but will also perpetuate the failures and racial disparities that pervade our criminal justice system,” the council members’ letter stated.

The organization behind the push to make American taxpayers pay for convicted criminal illegal aliens legal fees is funded by Soros and is a re-creation of the now-defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), as Breitbart Texas reported.

The Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) created the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project to get progressive, sanctuary cities onboard with plans to pay for illegal aliens’ criminal defense attorneys.

Soros showered CPD with funds recently, as Breitbart Texas reported. In 2016, Soros’ Open Society Foundation gave CPD $705,000 in grants to “support efforts challenging anti-Muslim sentiment” and “support advocacy on access to economic opportunity.” In the First Quarter of 2017, Soros’ Open Society Foundation gave CPD another $150,000 to “support policy advocacy on access to economic opportunity.”

read more:

Of course this info coming from an Uncle Rupe "affiliated" media source, we should be circumspect. But Soros is the guy who "brought you" the Panama Papers "scandal" designed to demonise people in many countries, while not touching a single hair of a US citizen (as if no-one in the US was crooked), all in order to "prove" that Putin was corrupt by association with a cello player.

Soros is worse than Uncle Rupe in some ways, especially considering that Soros really believes in "freedom" for you as long as it's in his own crooked terms of the Democrats without socialism and plenty of elitism.

Qatar's Emir to visit France

Qatar's Emir to visit France in late summer – French presidency

France said on Monday the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, would travel to France at the end of the summer, as the small Gulf country remains embroiled in a dispute with several other Arab states. President Emmanuel Macron spoke to al-Thani by telephone on Monday to discuss the situation in the region, the president's office said in a statement. "During this telephone exchange, the Emir said that in view of the situation, he expected to come to France at the end of summer," the statement added. Diplomatic sources had said earlier that Qatar's emir was expected to visit France in the coming weeks. (Reuters)


Meanwhile at cutting your nose  to spite your own face:


After the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation EU started economic  sanctions against Russia. These were extended after the shot down of MH17 and because of continous fighting in Eastern Ukraine.

Now in 2016 many EU memberstates want to lift these sanction. The main reason for this is economic pain. The situation in Eastern Ukraine has not improved. Another reason to drop sanctions is these failed to influence the settlement of any key issues.

The EU’s economic sanctions that target Russia’s energy, military, and financial sectors are up for renewal on January 31. The review of the EU’s Russia policy is likely to be held during an EU meeting in October .

An overview of states in favour of lifting sanctions. 

Germany: German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she had “the very greatest interest in stopping sanctions” against the Kremlin. Merkel also said her country, the biggest European economy, was ready to ask the EU to remove the bans against Russia if pro-Moscow forces operating in east Ukraine remain committed to peace. “As soon as we see progress in the Minsk agreement, we will loosen the sanctions,” Merkel told party colleagues at an event in northeastern Germany on Monday evening. (

France:  French President Francois Hollande has called for an end to European Union sanctions against Russia over the crisis in Ukraine amid growing dissent in the 28-nation bloc on the restrictive measures. (source)

Slovakia which holds EU presidency : EU should drop Russia sanctions, Slovak PM says after meeting Putin (Reuters)

Italy: Italy’s Demand Delays Extension Of EU Sanctions Against Russia (Radio Free Europe)

Hungary: has taken a similar line as Slovakia.

Czech Republic: President Milos Zeman, a backer of Russia, has repeatedly called for ending sanctions and the head of the upper house of the Czech parliament pleaded with German Chancellor Angela Merkel to end them

Luxembourg, Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus and Greece are also advocates of lifting the sanctions. (Russia Today)

Against lifting sanctions

Lithuania FM: EU Sanctions on Russia Should Stay (source)

The Netherlands: probably against lifting sanctions. Minister of Foreign affairs Koenders was critical  at Slovakian prime minister as the current EU presidency stated EU should lift sanctions (source)

Poland : Poland says lifting Russia sanctions now would weaken EU authority (Reuters)


Note that the "Russian annexation" of Crimea was only done AT THE REQUEST OF THE CRIMEAN PEOPLE, after a popular vote like a vote for "the independence of Scotland" somehow.. 

soros the interferer...


JAFFA, Israel — As a Holocaust survivor, a successful financier who embraces free market capitalism and a philanthropist who champions liberal democracy, George Soros should be a darling of the Israeli establishment. But Mr. Soros has failed the only litmus test that seems to count for Israel’s current leadership: unconditional support for the government, despite its policies of occupation, discrimination and disregard for civil and human rights.

For years Mr. Soros largely avoided Israel-related philanthropy, but he became involved in 2008 when he contributed to J Street, a moderate pro-Israel, pro-peace lobbying group based in Washington, after it was founded. Through his Open Society Foundations, Mr. Soros also contributes to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem and the anti-occupation group Breaking the Silence, which have been subjected to a growing delegitimization campaign by the Israeli government.

But Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, raised the stakes in this feud last week when his foreign ministry issued a statement that backed a Hungarian government propaganda effort against Mr. Soros and joined its denunciation of him. This contradicted earlier remarks by Israel’s ambassador to Hungary, Yossi Amrani, who had expressed dismay at the $21-million billboard campaign by the ruling party of Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, that has targeted Mr. Soros for his support of services for refugees and immigrants. The poster campaign, which has also attracted explicitly anti-Semitic graffiti, “evokes sad memories but also sows hatred and fear,” said the ambassador, referencing the fate of Hungarian Jews in the Holocaust.

The foreign ministry spokesman denied that the Israeli ambassador’s comments “meant to delegitimize criticism of George Soros” by Mr. Orban’s government. Instead, the spokesman went on to attack the billionaire philanthropist for “continuously undermining Israel’s democratically elected governments,” by his funding of organizations “that defame the Jewish state and seek to deny it the right to defend itself.”

Mr. Orban has personally accused Mr. Soros’s operations of “trying secretly and with foreign money to influence Hungarian politics” — a statement that appears to toy with an anti-Semitic trope about Jewish influence and yet strangely echoes the Israeli foreign ministry’s condemnation of Mr. Soros. It takes some gall on the part of Mr. Netanyahu to choose this moment to kick Mr. Soros while he’s down — not only because Mr. Soros is, once again, a victim of anti-Semitism in the heart of Europe, but also because he is being vilified in Hungary for trying to combat the same racist, anti-minority sentiments that led to the Holocaust.

read more:

Time for Soros to be exposed...


EU must regain independence from the soros empire

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has hit out at George Soros and the European Union as the statesman’s war of words with the Hungarian-American billionaire continues to escalate.

During a state visit to Romania Orban accused Soros of using the EU in order to create a "new, mixed, Muslimized Europe,” according to AP.

The prime minister said that Soros is now more powerful in Brussels than in Washington or Tel Aviv and he argued that European institutions should fight to limit his influence, reported Hungarian newspaper Magyar Nemzet.

‘Europe’s darkest hours’: Soros spokesman bashes Orban’s anti-migration campaign billboards

— RT (@RT_com) July 11, 2017


“The European Union, the European Commission must regain independence from the Soros Empire before the billionaire finishes his program for the destruction of the continent,” Orban said in a speech at the 28th Bálványos Summer University event in southern Romania.

The Hungarian stated that reforming Europe can only begin by stopping illegal migration into the EU and that Hungary’s border defenses will help with that effort.

During the speech Orban also pledged that Hungary will support Poland in a row with the EU over its controversial judicial reform plans.

READ MORE: Hungarian PM Orban pledges to support Poland against ‘European inquisition’

“The inquisition offensive against Poland can never succeed because Hungary will use all legal options in the European Union to show solidarity with the Poles,” he said.

Orban and Soros have clashed in the past, most prominently over the Soros-backed Central European University. In June the financier labelled Hungary a “Mafia state” and said he is the target of an“unrelenting propaganda campaign.”

READ MORE: George Soros and Viktor Orbán go to war in Budapest

Orban described the comments as “a declaration of war.”

”The only network which operates in mafia ways, which is not transparent... in Hungary is the Soros network," he said.

poll in Sunday’s Magyar Nemzet revealed that 43 percent of Hungarians think Soros is a threat to Hungary. Nearly as many people, 35 percent, said this is not the case.

read more:

US must throw out the soros empire...

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — "The DOJ should immediately declare George Soros and all of his organizations and staff members to be domestic terrorists, and have all of his personal an organizational wealth and assets seized under Civil Asset Forfeiture law," it reads.


The August 20 petition by E.B. accused Soros of attempts to "destabilize and otherwise commit acts of sedition against the United States and its citizens," including by creating and funding discrete organizations that seek to "facilitate the collapse of the systems and Constitutional government."

The document has been signed by 67,154 people as of late Thursday and needs further 32,846 signatures by September 19 to get a response from President Donald Trump’s administration.

read more:

nefarious soros...


For people like Soros and the globalists; they view the nation-state as a problem, because the nation expresses the will of the people of that nation, and it serves their personal interest, Richard Black, Republican Virginia state Senator, told RT.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the Fidesz Party Vice Chairman Gergely Gulyás are locked in a desperate battle with the billionaire financier and philanthropist George Soros, as well as his ideologically driven campaign to allow thousands of migrants to flood into Europe.

Leaders like Orban say the strategy will lead to the total collapse of a “Christian Europe,” and argue that Soros is trying to subvert Hungary and the rest of the EU.

Hungary's ruling party deputy chairman accuses #Soros of attacking country via NGOs & EU bureaucrats

— RT (@RT_com) November 21, 2017

RT:  What reputation does George Soros and the Open Society Foundations have in the world? What role do they play?

Richard Black: George Soros is an immensely wealthy billionaire. He has an interest in converting the world. He has a very, very sinister reputation throughout the world, and he is viewed widely as being anti-moral and anti-nationalistic. His belief appears to be that we should have a globalist government that dictates to the people and that nations are a sort of an impediment, because when you have national governments – they express the will of the people. When you have a globalist government it simply exhibits the views of the oligarchs and has very little regard for the people. That is the side he is on – he is with the oligarchs, he is not with the ordinary people.

RT:  The Hungarian government and the ruling party have been accusing George Soros of interfering in the domestic affairs of Hungary and other nations. Do you think their claims are valid? Do they have a reason to be wary of Soros’ activities?

RB: Soros has interfered very dramatically in the affairs of Hungary and a number of eastern European countries. But right now his focus is on Hungary. I would certainly applaud the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Orban is a man who gets things done. When he had illegal immigrants pouring across the border into Hungary, he sent the army out, he put up a wall, and within a month he had stopped immigration from crossing Hungary.

I think for people like Soros and the rest of the globalists, they view the nation-state as a problem because the nation expresses the will of the people of that nation and it serves their personal interest. Whereas if you have a one world government than it can simply disregard the interest of the people, and it can basically cater to the very wealthy oligarchs.

Soros accuses Hungary of ‘anti-Muslim sentiment’ & ‘anti-Semitic tropes’ in campaign against him

— RT (@RT_com) November 20, 2017

I would mention that the background of Soros is a very, very poor one. He is known as the man, who was a currency manipulator, who broke the Bank of England – one of the most powerful banks in the world. He disrupted the Malaysian financial stability back in 1997, and he crushed the Bank of Thailand and forced 600,000 temporary workers to give up their homes and leave. So he thinks nothing of ordinary people. He is willing to crush them out; he is willing to destroy their lives and their livelihoods.

Prime Minister Orban and also the Fidesz Vice Chairman [Gergely] Gulyás have united and have fought very hard against Soros. Soros is trying to subvert the country of Hungary. He does it through these non-governmental organizations. The NGOs – there are some good ones, but there are very many of them that act as a Fifth Column to undermine the stability and integrity of the countries. Often they work in conjunction with covert intelligence agencies – whether it is the CIA, MI6, French intelligence and so on. They act as sort of an internal intelligence agency that is always there when the time comes to overthrow the government. The prime minister of Hungary recognizes this danger. He is not going to stand for it.


Read more:


Read from top...


soros — the real instigator of WW3...

On Sunday, President Trump announced his intention to make those responsible for an alleged chemical weapons attack on Douma, including the Syrian government and its Russian and Iranian allies, pay a “big price” for their continued disregard for international law. The next day U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley declared that “The United States is determined to see the monster who dropped chemical weapons on the Syrian people held to account.” 

President Trump reinforced his call for action on Monday, noting that the United States would not sit back in the face of the alleged use of chemical weapons by Syria. “It will be met, and it will be met forcefully,” the president said, adding that those responsible for the attack will be held accountable, whether it was Syria, Russia, Iran or “all of them together.” Trump noted that a decision to use military force would be made “over the next 24 to 48 hours.” 

The pronouncements of imminent military action by the United States are not made in a vacuum. Russia, which has considerable military forces deployed inside Syria, including advanced military aircraft and anti-aircraft missile batteries, has rejected the allegations of chemical weapons use by Syria as a “fabrication,” and promised that any attack on Syria would result in “serious repercussions.” Russian forces inside Syria have reportedly been placed on “full alert” as American naval vessels capable of launching cruise missiles have arrived off the Syrian coast. 

The United States and Russia appear to be heading toward a direct military confrontation that, depending on the level of force used and the number, if any, casualties incurred by either side, carries with it the risk of a broader conflict. While Russian (and Syrian) claims of innocence regarding the alleged chemical weapons attack cannot be accepted at face value, the fact that the United States has not backed up its own claims with anything other than a recitation of accusations made by rebel groups opposed to the regime of Bashar al-Assad is problematic insofar as it shows a rush to judgement on matters of war. Given the potentially devastating consequences of any U.S.-Russian military clash over Syria, it would be better for all parties involved to wait for a full and thorough investigation of the alleged attack before any final decision on the use of force in response is made. 

There are two versions of what happened in Douma, a suburb of Damascus home to between 80,000 and 150,000 people. The one relied upon by the United States is provided by rebel forces opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. According to the Violations Documentation Center (VDC), a non-profit organization comprised of various Syrian opposition groups funded by the Asfari Foundation and George Soros’ Open Societies Foundation, at approximately 12 p.m. the Syrian Air Force attacked the vicinity of the Saada Bakery using munitions believed to contain “poisonous gas.” The VDC cited eyewitness accounts from members of the Syrian Civil Defense, or “White Helmets,” who described the smell of chlorine and the presence of numerous bodies assessed to have succumbed from gas sourced to a Syrian “rocket.” Later, at 7 p.m., a second air strike struck an area near Martyr’s Square, again using munitions assessed by eyewitnesses to contain “poisonous gas.” Doctors from the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) described symptoms that indicated that a nerve agent had been used. Images of victims in the locations allegedly attacked were released by a rebel-affiliated social media entity known as the “Douma Revolution” and the “White Helmets.” 


Read more:


Soros is an animal (sorry, animals) with no conscience. He will fabricate crafted crap to advance his domination of the world. Murdoch is not far behind. I wish that at this stage Mr Murdoch saw differently and that his media preached PEACE, not retaliation (for nothing — we know that the gas attack is fake flag set up by the Hollywood studios of the "White Helmets", under the control of MI6). But no. Murdoch's main rag, the New York Post has not even bothered mentioning that WW3 is about to be launched by mad Dumbdumb Trump — Uncle Rupe's boy. 

soros animosity towards those who don't bendover...

The victory of Victor Orbán and his party Fidesz in the Hungarian elections last month elicited the predictable flurry of laments over the rise of illiberalism. 

Such coverage has tended to emphasize the Orbán government’s animosity towards the Hungarian-American financier George Soros, a prolific contributor to progressive causes in Hungary and around the world. Soros is best known for his Open Society Foundation to which he donated $18 billion last year, his association with the Clintons, and as the financial speculator “who broke the Bank of England” in 1992. But he’s also come to be regarded as a leader of the liberal democratic resistance and a “victim” of illiberal tendencies in Hungary.  

Orbán’s legal and political moves against the Open Society Foundation and ongoing rhetoric against Soros himself certainly play into the dominant narrative of one-sided victimization. Soros’s own statements have contributed, too—for instance his claim that Orbán’s government is “an anti-democratic…mafia regime” more oppressive than the Soviet occupation. But such an unbalanced narrative fails to uncover what the Orbán-Soros conflict is really about, and with its narrow perspective is not much more insightful than the anti-Soros howls of the enraged right.

A more realistic analysis makes three things clear. First, the situation in Hungary is best understood not as one-sided hostility, but, to use Soros’s own words, “an unbridgeable conflict of principles.” Orbán and Soros stand for two essentially different visions of Hungary, and their conflict is about fundamental political questions: the nature of the Hungarian nation and the role of the Hungarian state in it. This is a fight between nationalists and anti-nationalists—those who view the nation as sovereign in Hungary and cherish its right to self-determination, and those who urge a move beyond sovereign states organized along lines of national identity. The standard narrative fails to do justice to this dynamic. 

Second, most Hungarians support nationalist ideals and values, which have deep roots in Hungarian history and intellectual tradition. Their backing demonstrates the continuing vitality of the ideas that three decades ago led European nations to liberate themselves from Soviet domination and establish democratic governments, including the contention, under pressure today, that nationalism and democracy can go hand in hand.

Third, Soros has support for his vision at the highest levels of the EU. This helps clarify the consistent popularity of nationalist politicians in Hungary: Hungarian nationalism occupies a defensive position, which no doubt consolidates its support.

Orbán is far from perfect. His rhetoric is often over the top, certain policies regarding the media and courts are questionable, and his corruption is alarming. Wariness is appropriate when he points to “Singapore, China, India, Turkey, Russia” as potential models for a new “illiberal state”—even if he promises to uphold the values of “Christianity, freedom, and human rights” while strengthening Hungary’s national community to be more than “a simple sum of individuals.”   

And yet whatever the flaws of Orbán and Fidesz, we should not fall for easy narratives that blind us to what is essential about the conflict in Hungary and the fundamentally different ideals on offer.  

Soros’s anti-nationalism is clear from his public statements, most recently last January at the World Economic Forum in Davos where he spoke about reversing nationalism. During the 2015 migrant crisis, he wrote that he sees “national borders as the obstacle” and “the protection of refugees as the objective,” whereas Orbán’s stance is the opposite and thereby undermines European values. Soros’s attitude towards national sovereignty and borders goes far back: in 1998 he called for the creation of “a new international authority that transcends the sovereignty of states to promote an open society.”  

These ideas are integral to Soros’s vision of an “Open Society” and drive his contributions to NGOs (over the years totaling $400 million in Hungary). His vision, however, runs counter to the nationalist ideals Orbán has supported and defended. The Constitution of Hungary, passed under Fidesz in 2011, makes them clear. The preamble—the “National Avowal”—connects modern Hungary to the past, its forebears, its Christian faith, and its historical constitution. It proclaims the constitutional continuity of the Hungarian state and ties its fortunes to the history of the Hungarian nation, while also affirming it as a democracy.

In short, the Preamble expresses the idea that Hungary is a homeland for all Hungarians, a state that is founded by and for the Hungarian nation. This, in fact, is the way nationhood is commonly thought about in Central and Eastern Europe. And as I have argued with regard to Lithuania and elsewhere, the type of nationalism that calls for sovereignty (not superiority) and self-determination in a nation’s ancestral lands was a key force for liberation from Soviet domination.

This is why Orbán-backed nationalist ideals are so popular in Hungary. It is true that the constitution was passed only seven years ago along party lines and with some controversy. But it is also important to note that, unlike other Eastern European countries, Hungary did not adopt a new constitution after independence; instead it merely modified its old socialist one as a temporary measure. A new governing charter was long overdue.


Read more:


Read from top.

there is such a person in the united states...

Back in June 2018


On the eve of his first visit to Austria, Vladimir Putin gave a lengthy interview to Austrian television channel ORF.

The interviewer, Armin Wolf, was interested not only in issues of Russia's foreign policy, but also in domestic political plans of Vladimir Putin harbours. It is worthy of note that, as the Austrian journalist said, there were no prohibitions from the Kremlin concerning the topics of the interview. 

Armin Wolf was least interested in details of the possible mutually beneficial cooperation between Moscow and Vienna, although this was the reasons for the interview to take place. Contrary to the general trend set by the United States, Austria did not expel Russian diplomats in connection with the so-called "Skripal case."

"Austria and Russia have long had very good and deep relationship. Austria is our traditional and reliable partner in Europe. Despite all the difficulties of previous years, with Austria, we have never interrupted our dialogue in politics, security and economy," Putin said, adding that the two countries have many common interests.

The interviewer, Armin Wolf, was interested not only in issues of Russia's foreign policy, but also in domestic political plans of Vladimir Putin harbours. It is worthy of note that, as the Austrian journalist said, there were no prohibitions from the Kremlin concerning the topics of the interview. 

Armin Wolf was least interested in details of the possible mutually beneficial cooperation between Moscow and Vienna, although this was the reasons for the interview to take place. Contrary to the general trend set by the United States, Austria did not expel Russian diplomats in connection with the so-called "Skripal case."

"Austria and Russia have long had very good and deep relationship. Austria is our traditional and reliable partner in Europe. Despite all the difficulties of previous years, with Austria, we have never interrupted our dialogue in politics, security and economy," Putin said, adding that the two countries have many common interests.

However, Wolf wanted to find out why the Russian administration was working closely with Austrian nationalist parties that are critical of the European Union. The question contained an allusion to Russia's alleged intention to split the European Union.

Putin had to patiently explain obvious things to the Austrian reporter:

"We have no goal to divide anything in the European Union, we are interested in the prosperous EU, because the European Union is our largest trade and economic partner, and the more problems the European Union has, the more risks and uncertainties we have to deal with," Putin said.

Of course, the Austrian journalist could not but ask Putin about "Russia's interference" in the presidential election in the United States. The journalist asked the Russian president about activities of the Internet Research Agency, aka the "troll factory", which is associated with Russian entrepreneur Yevgeny Prigozhin. The journalist persistently tried to get Vladimir Putin to confirm the thesis that the man who is commonly referred to as the "chef" because of his restaurant business, could influence the elections in the US, because he had very close ties with the Russian government.

Putin had this to say in response to this question: "There is such a person in the United States, Mr. Soros, who interferes in all affairs throughout the world, and I often hear our American friends saying that America has nothing to do with it as a state. Rumour has it that Mr. Soros wants to shake the euro, the European currency, and this is already being discussed in expert circles. Ask the US State Department why he wants to do it. You will be told that the US State Department has nothing to do with it as this is a personal matter of Mr. George Soros. Here, we can say that this is a personal matter of Mr. Prigozhin. This is my answer to you. Are you satisfied with this answer?"

Putin did not give a direct answer to the question of why he has not been able to have a meeting with his US counterpart Donald Trump lately.

"The pre-election campaign for the Congress is getting started, and the presidential election is not too far away, attacks on the President of the United States continue in different directions. I think that this is the first thing," the Russian leader said explaining the reason why he has not been able to meet Donald Trump lately.

Armin Wolf asked a question about the possibility of a nuclear war between the United States and North Korea. According to Vladimir Putin, "this is a terrible assumption," because the DPRK is a close neighbour of Russia, and one of Pyongyang's nuclear test sites is only 190 kilometres from the Russian border.

"We are pinning great hopes on a personal meeting between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, because mutual claims have gone too far," Putin said.

Putin had to answer biased questions about the relations between Russia and Ukraine. He tried to explain Russia's position in detail, but the Austrian journalist tried to take the conversation in another direction.

For example, speaking about the MH17 disaster, Armin Wolf dogmatically stated that the passenger plane was shot down with a missile of Russian origin and assumed that it was about time Russia should admit that officially. 

"If you have some patience and listen to me, then you will know my point of view on this issue, okay?" Putin replied, adding that, firstly, Ukraine has Soviet-made weapons and, secondly, Russia is not allowed to access the materials of the investigation, even though Ukraine can access it. 

The journalist continued by saying that "everyone already knows where the missile came from." Putin responded: "Malaysian officials have recently stated that they did not see Russia's involvement in the terrible tragedy. They said that they had no evidence to prove it. Don't you know about this?"

Armin Wolf continued with a question about Russia's alleged military interference in the Crimean events from 2014.

"Russian army units have always been present in the Crimea. Do you want to just ask questions all the time or do you want to hear my answers? The first thing that we did when events in Ukraine began...but what kind of events were they? I will now say, and you will tell me yes or no. It was an armed coup and seizure of power. Yes or no, can you tell me?"

The journalist mumbled that he was no expert on the subject of the Ukrainian constitution. Explaining how the Crimean peninsula escaped from Ukraine's rampant nationalism and reunited with Russia, Vladimir Putin switched to German in an attempt to convey his message to the Austrian journalist. 

"What should happen so Russia returns the Crimea to Ukraine?" the journalist asked.

"There are no such conditions and there cannot be. You have interrupted me yet again. If you had let me finish, you would have understood my point. When the unconstitutional armed coup took place in Ukraine, when power was seized by force, our army units were deployed in Ukraine on legal grounds - there was a Russian army base there. There was no one else there. But there were our armed forces there."

The journalist was ready to interrupt Putin again, so the president had to say: "Seien Sie so nett, lassen Sie mich etwas sagen." ["Will you please be so kind and let me proceed."]. Then he continued:

"When the spiral of unconstitutional actions in Ukraine started twisting, when the people in the Crimea started sensing danger, when whole trains of nationalists started arriving there, when they  started blocking buses and automotive transport, the people wanted to defend themselves. The first thing that came to mind was to restore their rights that had been received within the framework of Ukraine, when the Crimea was granted autonomy. This is what kicked everything off, and the parliament started working on the process to determine its independence on Ukraine. Is this strictly prohibited by the Charter of the United Nations? No. The right of nations to self-determination is clearly stated there," Putin said.

See more at