The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 21, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Intelligence Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The Final Phase Theory
HiloBill    12/5/2005 5:12:37 PM
?The Final Phase? Theory

[This is not meant as an in-depth presentation, however, especailly after reading some of the commentary in the Angleton thread and the Intel Isn't the Problem thread, it might be fitting to give this item its own posting. I wrote this today (5 Dec 05) and posted on a different forum. - HB]

For those who are interested in this, I'll lay out a synopsis below of what "the final phase" is in relationship to explaining the actions of Putin, Russia, China, et. al.

Granted, this is a "theory," but it is not a baseless, conspiracy theory that requires innuendo and supposition for ?proof.? It is based on - at least - two defectors' information brought to the West in the 60's and 70's and is documented in various writings of theirs and others.

There are many wild conspiracy theories afloat these days, which deserve scorn. In my view, those theories that say a secret cabal within our own governmental structures (?The Powers That Be?) which would pre-plant explosives in the Murrah Building in Oklahoma (the same for the WTC Towers); attach missiles to the jet that crashed into the Pentagon; allude to an Israeli component to the New World Order theory of nefarious undertakings (note the anti-Semitism behind such theories); oil corporations? (along with the Bush?s, Cheney?s, et. al.) total-controlling ways and designs; Western elites conniving to usher in world domination; etc., etc., etc., are baseless ?theories? that require an incredible amount ? ultimately ? of blind faith and belief in issues based on innuendo, supposition, and which judges various manifestations of incompetence, stupidity, naiveté, and/or wishful thinking on the part of our elected leadership as somehow being intentional, malicious, and nefarious intent ? a secret cabal of the rich and influential (an interchangeable term: ?capitalists?).

Understandably ? especially in light of the theories mentioned above ? there are some who will immediately reject ?the final phase? theory as nonsense, due in part to some other theories afloat these days. But, all I can express to you is that I have been following this for over 16 years and all the events that have unfolded in the East in the intervening years only convinces more of its validity.

(To read a more in-depth presentation of the following synopsis, please read the introduction at www.thefinalphase.com )

Very briefly, ?the final phase? theory is this:

Anatoliy Golitsyn (a Ukrainian who became a major in the KGB) defected to the West in 1961. He had first-hand knowledge of a planned restructuring of Russia?s intelligence organizations combined with a long-range plan of strategic deception against the West aimed at its eventual destruction.

He said that the Sino-Soviet split was a ?scissors strategy? which would fake enmity between these two communist nations in order to play off the West?s expected response of taking advantage of the split by making China a stronger nation in order to neutralize Russia?s threat. (Sino-Soviet border clashes in the 60?s ? where real battles were fought, real blood was shed, and real lives were lost were all part of the larger plan and factored in as acceptable, calculated ?losses.?)

Golitsyn said that Nixon?s rapprochement of China was exactly what the scissors strategy had in mind and one of its objectives. (Look at China today.)

Golitsyn said, that in ?the final phase? of the strategic deception, Russia and China would become openly allied (note the formal alliance of 16 July 2001), but that such alliance would not alarm the West ? at the time of their future open alliance - due to the successful effect of the scissors strategy on the West?s perceptions.

He said the West has failed to properly analyze developments in the East due to a flawed understanding of the concepts behind Russia and China?s thinking, which is based on dialectical thought. The long-range strategic deception is very much based on the apparent manifestation of opposition forces, which look the West as signs of chaos or dissembled, fractured unions.

In 1984 (although written and warned about long before then), Golitsyn?s book New Lies for Old was published (Gorbachev did not come to power until 1985 ? the USSR did not ?dissolve? until Christmas Day, 1991). In his book, he said the long-range plan of strategic deception would enter into the most dangerous phase of the plan ? ?the final phase? ? with the advent of a leader who would bring about a new twist to the deception that would convince the West of the USSR?s eventual downfall. The deception would entail social and economic rationale behind a surge of independence in the Eastern Bloc. Liberalizations would be instituted. The Warsaw Pact might dissolve. The Berlin Wall might be taken down. East and West Germany might be unified. And, even the USSR itself might dissolve under the surging ?democratic? forces. (Golitsyn predicted over 139 events that would manifest themselves as all part and parcel of the strategic deception. See Mark Riebling?s site that addresses Golitsyn?s predictions: link )

A Czechoslovakian defector (Feb ?68), MG Jan Sejna, wrote about a similar deception (We Will Bury You (1982) entailing the apparent dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in furtherance of leading the West astray in its analysis of the East Bloc?s future events. Sejna also emphasized the strategic use of domestic organized criminal elements which would grow to gobble up the rest of the world?s criminal syndicates in order to implement future ploys against the West while providing plausible deniability of state-sponsored provocations of the Kremlin.

In 1995, Golitsyn wrote another book, The Perestroika Deception, which continued to explain the more recent manifestations of ?the final phase,? which included the fake ?August Coup? in Russia as well as other matters.

Long story short, Golitsyn was fired by the CIA in 1969 as a crackpot ?paranoid? and later got rid of his main supporter, James Angleton, in 1974. Angleton was unique in intelligence history getting his start in the WWII OSS (Office of Strategic Services) and its transformation into the modern CIA ? he was the chief of CIA?s counterintelligence branch and considered by many as an absolute genius, especially in matters of understanding Soviet deception practices and techniques.

It is a bit complicated to explain how and why these two voices within the CIA were eventually snuffed out, but suffice it to say, they were. Both Golitsyn and Angleton were eventually tarred and feathered by the established group think at CIA and have been relegated as ?paranoids? responsible for the development of ?sick think? at Langley.

The more you know about this subject, the more you know about Golitsyn and Angleton, and the more you reflect to the historical developments since their departure, the more you realize that what they said back then applies to today in spades.

Modern Russia and China (et. al., e.g., Cuba, Venezuela, & others) are encircling the West geo-politically and otherwise with one goal in mind: burying us.

This in essence is ?the final phase? theory which also ties into today?s terrorism by elements directly or indirectly influenced and manipulated from Moscow and Beijing.

[HB]
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2
Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:The Final Phase Theory   12/6/2005 12:06:38 AM
Interesting theory, but unforseeable events can disrupt this grand plan. 1. If the Sino-Soviet war was part of this deception, then the cultural revolution in China, which set China back culturally and technologically by decades, was a wrench in the works. 2. Castro's impending death. I would be fairly certain that the US gov't and Cuban establishment in Florida (which is very rich and fairly powerful) will not let another Castro take his place. Direct Russian or Chinese intervention may result in a shooting war. 3. Taiwanese independence. 4. Collapse of North Korea, all of Kim's sons are more or less unfit or unwilling to take the reins. No Kim, no NK. 5. Japan and China mixing it up in the East China Sea, this conflict, more then Taiwan, could snowball out of control resulting in major losses for China and a newly militant and nuclear Japan effectively controlling the northeastern pacific ocean. 6. Chavez is really starting to get a big head and may try to dominate S. American politics. Brazil won't stand for it and neither will Columbia. Brazil by themselves could put Venezuela in their place. This theory doesn't sound that surprising, Russia and China have to have something to counter the encirclement of the english speaking countries and the social equity/advanced technology/comfortable lifestyle they have to offer.
 
Quote    Reply

stratego    RE:The Final Phase Theory--HiloBill   12/27/2005 8:41:09 PM
I am a proud owner of both Golitsyn books and I feel, that his theories are basically correct. (I must confess I have not read straight through in these books, but skipped around and gleaned the essence of both. They are difficult reading, partly because the subject matter is so upsetting.) It is very nice to find somebody else, who shares a high-level of confidence and Golitsyn. It is rare in my experience. I don't need to go into detail, which you on what Golitsyn's statements and theories were or explain how I agree with the bulk of what he said. However, here is where I think Golitsyn went partially wrong. He tended to think continuously in terms, all of a Russian or Soviet state, that would be a threat to the United States. He understood of course, that Russian subversion of America and the West was important but he tended to see this subversion as, in the final analysis, creating a situation in which Russia could prevail based on military strength. My analysis here is not really a negative critique of Golitsyn. His analysis and predictions were amazingly accurate. But I figure it like this. By 1993 or 1995 when he wrote his last memorandum in his second book, Golitsyn was maybe 67 years old. He had been isolated from US intelligence for more than 20 years---and maybe out of touch with any intelligence agencies for all we know. At that time, I feel he was showing a tendency to elaborate on the same old theories. They were absolutely great when he first came up with some and even when he wrote his first book. Now, however, I feel we can look at Golitsyn's great knowledge and wisdom with a new filter. Suvorov of made a statement in one of his books to the effect that the subversive power of the Soviet Union was greater than their military power. With time, this imbalance has increased. Russia is now militarily weak, and I do not foresee a time when they would be a military threat to the U. S. However, their subversive power is growing by leaps and bounds. The most important step in this process, as correctly predicted as a strong possibility by Golitsyn, was to pretend to be out of the "subversion business" altogether. Naturally, this is something any subversive entity would love to do, but is usually impossible. However, through the very real dual strategy of 1) abandoning communism in Russia and 2) relinquishing the empire in eastern Europe and 3)breaking up the Soviet Union--- Russia has managed to convince the world of their nearly complete innocence. Of course, giving up Eastern Europe was probably just going along with the inevitable and in many senses made Russia stronger. The termination of communism in Russia was a great tragedy---to most of the rank-and-file members of the Communist Party and the nomenclatura. Many of these individuals have no doubt lost much. However, the KGB (now FSB) has done just fine. They are now ruling Russia. Arguably, the transformation from rule by the Communist Party to rule by the KGB was extremely efficient. The Communist Party, of course had not much useful function other than taking care of themselves pretty well. The KGB, on the other hand, they created something quite incredible in the world---the finest process of subversion in the history of the planet. (My view of KGB subversion leans heavily on Pacepa and Suvorov as well as Golitsyn.) The great thing the KGB (FSB)has pulled off is to "launder" their worldwide terrorism operation so that they no longer have any responsibility for it whatsoever in the eyes of everyone else. Most astute people understood, in the pre-1990 era, that the Soviets were training, paying, and exerting a very large amount of influence over terrorists throughout the world. But by transforming their carers operation into an Islamacist form, and orchestrating a series of fake Chechen terrorist acts, combined with some real Chechen rebellion allowed to fester, Russia has transformed itself into an enemy of terrorism on the side of the countries fighting terroism. Needless to say, this is a fantastic achievement. As the book, Iran's nuclear option, by Al J. and venture, 2005 points out, Russia has supplied much of the missile technology for Iranian ICBMs and is now building nuclear reactors that will provide them with material for atomic bombs. Since Iran is the main supporter of terrorism in the world, link between Russia and terrorism seems clear to myself. However, I'm not really sure anybody else in the world agrees with me. Ann Coulter's book Treason (2003) explains that McCarthy was correct in the 1950s, when he said there was a communist conspiracy in the United States. Presumably then, this idea has now become acceptable in the conservative mainstream. however, as far as I know, there are no conservatives who suspect that, having built up a massive mechanism of subversion throughout the world, as they now admit the Russians did, that the Russians would still be running this massive mechanism. The reason this is impossible, is that the Russians no longer believe in communism. Needless to say, I find this wonderful evening to be in error. The KGB/FSB, now running Russia, can find many useful things to do with the worldwide subversive structure, that they built up in 70 years
 
Quote    Reply

HiloBill    RE:The Final Phase Theory--HiloBill   1/2/2006 6:09:24 AM
Stratego, Please contact me. We have quite a few things to discuss. Here's a piece that Dr. Joseph D. Douglass Jr. (author of Red Cocaine: The Drugging of America and the West) that you will especially want to read re the plausible deniability related to terrorism: It's titled "Drugs, Russia and Terrorism" link You would most enjoy reading some of the material on The Final Phase Forum here: link And, the new special edition on James Angleton of my site: www.TheFinalPhase.com Finally, I'll post separately a recent piece (below) by Jeff Nyquist, which should spark a few things inside you. It's called "The Undead Again." It's great to meet someone else who has made some sense out of the wilderness of mirrors. Happy New Year!
 
Quote    Reply

HiloBill    RE:The Final Phase Theory   1/2/2006 6:10:42 AM
link Weekly Column - 12.23.2005 The Undead Again by J. R. Nyquist Writing in the Dec. 20th Wall Street Journal, Robert Kaplan tells us that Nepal ?could be the first country since the fall of the Berlin Wall where communists emerge triumphant.? In saying this, Kaplan glosses over the finer details of South African, Venezuelan and Brazilian politics. He forgets the triumphant communist revolution in Congo and the red elephant ?hidden? in the back room of German politics. Because we are not allowed to say that communism is alive and well, every instant of communist victory is without larger significance. We must not interpret acts of subversion or agitation, however blatant, as coordinated or inspired by the apparatus of the old communist international. We simply mustn?t! The peace movement, anti-Americanism, labor unrest, campus radicalism, international terrorism, and every other form of revolutionary protest was, at one time, encouraged by communist outlets (like the Communist Party USA). But now it seems that nobody is watching the communists. Nobody thinks they are capable of making trouble. Indeed, we no longer seem interested in attaching the ?communist? label to those inspired by Karl Marx or his latter-day followers. It isn?t polite to remember that communists have always portrayed themselves as agrarian reformers, populists, democrats and social democrats. And so we accept the deceptive labels that men like Fidel Castro, Lula da Silva and Evo Morales employ. Meanwhile, a renewed and extended communist bloc is emerging ? tied to Beijing and Moscow. But why take alarm? After all, everyone knows that ?communism is dead.? And besides, a country like Nepal is unimportant. Who cares about Nepal? The Bush Administration, according to Kaplan, ?has bought into popular abstractions about how to best implant democracy while ignoring the facts on the ground.? And so the communists will win. the beginning of the Cold War to its supposed end, the communist bloc excelled at espionage, subversion and psychological warfare. With a tradition of feigned retreat and reform, Soviet Russia engaged in a great peace offensive in the late 1980s. This offensive was coupled with far-reaching domestic reforms. Under the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev, Moscow exchanged a bloated neo-Stalinist façade for an autocratically managed democracy. The change was deceptive. Last March 6, Washington Times columnist Bill Gertz reported on a meeting of U.S. intelligence officials in Texas. According to Gertz, CIA official Barry Royden revealed that the ?Russian intelligence services are targeting U.S. troops in the Middle East for recruitment as agents, as well as seeking recruits among Americans in Russia.? Royden said that Russian intelligence officers were using ?very aggressive actions,? like entrapment and blackmail to recruit American citizens and servicemen. As for the Chinese communists, a senior FBI counterintelligence official told Gertz that ?Chinese activities are a major threat ? specifically Beijing?s covert targeting of U.S. weapons technology.? Now why would the Russians and Chinese ? our dear friends ? engage in such activity? Several months ago a retired Cold War spy sent me a note. He characterized the situation in Eastern Europe as follows: ?The communist forces have reorganized themselves under new ?name tags? but their goals are still the same: to dominate the world and to destroy the enemies of their wicked ideology. I am not naïve,? he added. ?I don?t believe in political declarations and slogans. I am trying to follow up facts of life. And these facts are more and more alarming. The foreign policy of G.W. Bush is irresponsible?. The United States are unable even to control Iraq, not to speak of the world. [The] Russians and Chinese are quietly building up a huge first strike and destruction capability, deceiving the U.S. and Europe. The scheme is emerging more and more clearly. The NATO alliance is becoming more and more weak and downgraded by the NATO members themselves.? Another Cold War spy, KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn, predicted this would happen in a 1984 book titled New Lies for Old. Golitsyn was a senior analyst in the NATO section of the Information Department of the KGB. He defected in December 1961 and ended up working for the CIA in the 1960s, becoming closely associated with CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton. By the mid-1970s Golitsyn and Angleton?s views on Soviet strategy were decisively rejected by the CIA, and both were sent into retirement. By 1975 the leaders of U.S. intelligence had dismissed Golitsyn?s analysis as ?sick think.? Sick or not, Golitsyn accurately predicted the collapse of communism more than five years before it began. He predicted that a younger, more liberal Soviet ruler would soon appear and a period of reform would be initiated. Golitsyn?s 1984 book carefully outlined the types of changes to be expected in the East Bloc; he emphasized that the changes would be initiated ?from above? and that they would be deceptive. Golitsyn?s key predictive assertion occurs in the following passage: ?The dialectic of this offensive consists of a calculated shift from the old, discredited Soviet practice to a new, ?liberalized? model, with a social democratic façade, to realize the communist planners? strategy for establishing a United Europe. At the beginning they introduced a variation of the 1968 Czechoslovakian ?democratization.? At a later phase they will shift to a variation of the Czechoslovakian takeover of 1948.? A very simple question follows: From everything we know today, is the above paragraph a description of what is now happening in Europe, or is it entirely mistaken? Does it describe the progress of communism is Latin America ? in Venezuela, Bolivia and Brazil? One should not hesitate to list Nepal in this larger context Furthermore, it is an indisputable fact that a KGB clique, led by President Vladimir Putin, governs Russia. At least one Western intelligence agency has concluded that Putin has secret ?advisors? who cannot be identified. Who are they and why are they secret? At the same time, outright communists are still governing former Soviet republics and satellite countries. Czech activists like Hana Catalanova warn that the Czech Republic is dominated by hidden communist structures. In Poland, journalists like Tomasz Pompowski and Dariusz Rohnka (author of ?The Fatal Fiction?), have explained that the communists are manipulating Poland?s government and economy. And then there?s the case of Romania. We have no greater authority for what happened in Romania than Andrei Codrescu, author of The Hole in the Flag. His account is a decisive clarification, from a major writer, of what really happened to communism in Eastern Europe in 1989. From Chapter 11 of Codrescu?s book, titled ?The Mysteries of Sibiu,? we read: ?Last night ? I had gotten up, seized by thirst. Before going to bed, I had consumed a goodly amount of Stolichnaya with a Soviet journalist who?d been in Sibiu for a week. He had also been in Timiþoara and told me a number of interesting things, including the fact that on December 10 ? five days before the protest in front of Reverend Toke?s house ? there were nearly a dozen TASS correspondents there. When I asked him why, my friend winked. His wink troubled me. ?What were nearly a dozen TASS correspondents doing in a remote Transylvanian town, many days before anything started to happen?? I insisted. He winked again.? But when Golitsyn?s detailed predictions about the future democratization of the communist bloc came true, the conservatives tumbled over one another to declare victory and assign the credit to Ronald Reagan. Among intelligence historians, it was only Mark Riebling who noticed: that ?of Golitsyn?s falsifiable predictions, 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the end of 1993 ? an accuracy rate of nearly 94 percent.? The reaction of William F. Buckley to this accuracy rating was to denounce Golitsyn as a paranoid in the pages of National Review. With the crushing force of a hot-air hurricane, post-Cold War American opinion blew toward the isles of optimism. In place of the Seven Cities of Gold and the Fountain of Youth, the new Conquistadors found the ?peace dividend? and elected ?cheap hawk? conservatives like Newt Gingrich to lead the U.S. Congress. From this imaginary ?peace dividend? flowed economic exuberance like milk and honey. Defense spending was slashed. Technological secrets were allowed to slip, ever so carelessly, into Russian and Chinese hands. The intelligence services put many Cold Warriors to pasture. It was time to make money and forget the horrors of Mutual Assured Destruction. The great and influential School of Insincerity finally took the West?s intellectual and political culture by the throat. To describe this ?school? I quote the words of British historian William Lecky: ?Its end was not truth, but plausibility.? © 2005 Jeffrey R. Nyquist
 
Quote    Reply

stratego    RE:The Final Phase Theory--HiloBill   1/3/2006 1:01:37 PM
HiloBill, I agree we should get in touch. However, my PC cannot utilize the standard type of communications link used by your website (some defect). Are you registered on the Free Republic (freerepublic.com)? If not you should be. Please do so and tell me your Free Republic handle here, if you would. Thanks, stratego
 
Quote    Reply

HiloBill    RE:The Final Phase Theory--HiloBill   1/4/2006 5:53:40 AM
Stratego, It's better to just e-mail me at thefinalphase2005@yahoo.com WW p.s. You are able to view TheFinalPhase.com, aren't you? I wasn't sure about your message.
 
Quote    Reply

HiloBill    Russia's Implausible Deniability   3/31/2006 4:49:50 PM
This is a grand slam article by J.R. Nyquist that came out on 31 Mar 06 - it so very pertinent to this thread (I placed a copy on the military forum, too, under "Russia AND China - to Two are Allied"): link Weekly Column - 03.31.2006 Implausible Deniability by J. R. Nyquist In the appendix of Kenneth Timmerman?s book, Countdown to Crisis (page 353), we find a secret 1995 Russian document acquired by Congressman Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) through sources in Moscow. ?This chilling document,? writes Timmerman, ?confirms in black and white the suspicions the Israelis expressed about Russia?s missile transfers to Iran. There was nothing arbitrary or accidental about the sales; they were Russian state policy.? Besides missiles, the Russians have sent nuclear technology to Iran as well. But Moscow says this is entirely unintentional. So what are we to think? In the service of plausible deniability, Russia?s disinformation specialists have devised a cover story: Iran?s uranium enrichment owes its success to ?the breakaway region of Adjara? and its president, Aslan Abashidze (described by critics as a ?commie stooge?). Piling misdirection upon misdirection, Adjara is a breakaway region of a breakaway Soviet republic (Georgia); self-described as a model democratic government with a vigorous economy, ?beautiful, successful and secure.? The convenience of ?breakaway regions? governed by ?stooges? is that they can serve as cut-outs in WMD tech transfers to rogue states and terrorist organizations. Russian nuclear experts, armed with bogus passports, filtered through Adjara to Iran. The rest is history, as Iran is about to become a nuclear power (if it isn?t already). After the necessary tech and material transfers were complete, President Abashidze was conveniently overthrown by an angry mob (probably organized by the Georgian Interior Minister). Now Abashidze resides comfortably in Moscow, protected by ?powerful friends.? Journalists, Academics and the U.S. government will believe the Abashidze alibi. ?It?s doubtful anyone in the Kremlin ? knew what Mr. Abashidze was up to,? wrote Tsotne Bakuria, a former Georgian lawmaker and visiting scholar at George Washington University?s Elliot School of International Affairs. Bakuria?s words are soothing and useful for those who wish to maintain their illusions. But Timmerman?s secret document tells the real story. Prepared for the Russian General Staff, it is titled ?CONCEPTUAL PROVISIONS OF A STRATEGY FOR COUNTERING THE MAIN EXTERNAL THREATS TO RUSSIAN FEDERATION NATIONAL SECURITY.? According to Russia?s strategists, the United States is the main external threat to Russia. Not Islamic terrorists. Not Chinese communists. Not Iranian clerics. According to the Russian strategists, ?As a rule, the United States implements its policy in the Russian direction in coordination with other Western countries, Israel, and Japan.? The Western coalition seeks to advance ?the processes of democratization and of [Russia?s] transition to a market economy?.? Democratization and economic freedom are regarded with horror by Russian policy-makers. Nothing could be more disastrous for Russia?s KGB leadership. From first to last, democratization in Russia has been a sham. As Russian investigative journalist Yevgenia Albats explained more than a decade ago: ?In its new incarnation ? the KGB lost virtually none of its former functions. It keeps a close watch on joint ventures with the West, still monitors every area that affects state interests. It still bugs whatever government lines in chooses.? And now a top KGB official is president of the Russian Federation. Such an outcome should have been expected from the moment Mikhail Gorbachev declared his program of reform. The Kremlin has a grand strategy. It is the grand strategy of Nikita Khrushchev, Yuri Andropov and Vladimir Putin. As KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn explained in his 1984 book, New Lies for Old, Moscow seeks to undermine Western unity while building a new anti-American bloc of countries in a post-Soviet world. (Golitsyn anticipated the collapse of the Soviet Union by several years.) Russia?s new anti-American bloc presently includes Iran, China, South Africa, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Vietnam, Syria, Brazil and now Bolivia. The secret Russian document published by Timmerman plainly outlines Russia?s strategy of selling ?military nuclear and missile technologies to such countries as Iran and Iraq, and to Algeria after Islamic forces arrive in power there.? How can Russia be America?s ally against Islamic extremism when Russia?s strategists are working to arm the Islamists with nuclear weapons? As if to clarify this matter, the secret document further admits: ?Russia?s direct military alliance with some of the countries mentioned also should not be excluded, above all with Iran, within the framework of which a Russian troop contingent and tactical nuclear weapons could be stationed on the shores of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.? The story of Iran is also the story of Iraq. Russia was training Iraqi intelligence agents and supplying Saddam with weapons for killing Americans from the start. And now comes another scandal. A Pentagon report says that Russia?s ambassador to Iraq was feeding Saddam Hussein intelligence on U.S. military plans during the Iraq invasion. It seems that the Russians, as one might expect, penetrated the U.S. Central Command and gave vital intelligence to America?s enemy. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice intends to ask the Russians whether they officially authorized this underhanded play. But don?t expect U.S.-Russian relations to collapse. Secretary of State Rice believes the Russian government may be innocent of the charge, since ?independent operators? abound in Russia; and it has long been Washington?s policy to regard hostile Russian actions as unintentional. As a Russia expert Condoleezza Rice ought to know better. Duplicity is a Russian national trait, long ago described in the Marquis de Custine?s book, Empire of the Czar: A Journey Through Eternal Russia. ?The Russians are still persuaded of the efficaciousness of falsehood,? he wrote. ?In Russia, secrecy presides over everything; a silence that is superfluous insures the silence that is necessary; in short, the people are Chinese disguised?.? According to Custine, the Russians are great imitators and therefore great observers: ?This talent, which is proper to a people in its infancy, often degenerates into a mean system of espionage.? At the risk of boring the reader, I will again point out that Russia?s head of state is a KGB officer. This is no accident, since chance could not have produced a result so perfectly in accordance with historical experience. A country does not flip. It cannot turn into its opposite. A country, like a person, remains true to its nature. The individual is free to be what he is, but national character is never free. Its stamp is deep and indelible. ?A barbarian jealousy,? wrote Custine, ?an envy, puerile, but impossible to disarm, influences the greater number of the Russians in their intercourse with the men of other lands.? The Russian mentality, he explained, was shaped by centuries of tyranny. ?I do not reproach the Russians for being what they are,? he added, ?what I blame in them is, their pretending to be what we are.? The Russians are better diplomats, better liars, better manipulators than their rivals in the West. They give lip service to Western ideas without believing in them. They pretend to be your friend. They extend the hand of friendship. But do not believe them. According to Custine, ?We [in the West] suffer all the evils of idle talking, they have all the advantages of secrecy.? Russia?s heart is a secret place, inaccessible to outsiders. ?That nation,? wrote Custine, ?essentially aggressive, greedy under the influence of privation, expiates beforehand, by a debasing submission, the design of exercising a tyranny over other nations: the glory, the riches which it hopes for, consoles it for the disgrace to which it submits. To purify himself from the foul and impious sacrifice of all public and personal liberty, the slave, upon his knees, dreams of the conquest of the world.? Russia has based itself on lies and secrecy for hundreds of years. According to Custine ?Social life in that country [Russia] is a permanent conspiracy against the truth.? In Russia, he writes, ?whoever is not a dupe is viewed as a traitor.? Custine further explained, ?The Russians are nothing more than a conquering community; their strength does not lie in mind, but in war, that is, in stratagem and ferocity.? Russia dreams of America?s fall, and actively supports America?s Islamic enemies. Any denial of Russian activities in support of Islamic terrorism cannot be plausible and doesn?t make sense. But the West wants to maintain its comforting illusions. And so the game continues. © 2006 Jeffrey R. Nyquist
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    Tin Foil Hat Brigade   4/1/2006 10:08:46 AM
Utter silliness. Y'all have fun.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:Tin Foil Hat Brigade   4/1/2006 3:28:02 PM
Well, if there is any truth to it, we could simply give China a wink and a nod to make a real move for Siberia. Beijing covets all of that land, oil, gas, timber and metals at the same level or higher than Taiwan. Get China to invade, Russia retaliates with nukes and they wreck each other. The US swoops in to smash the PLA via the air and sea while the Russian army exhausts itself on land. In the end both Russia and China are a wreck and the US has shadow influence over a big chunk of Siberia.
 
Quote    Reply

HiloBill    Russia & China are Allied   4/1/2006 3:40:26 PM
The notion of Russia and China at odds with each other is a long time part and parcel of their unity against the West (you'll have to read elsewhere here "Russia AND China are Allied." Or, just go to my Website and read the introduction there: www.TheFinalPhase.com As far as the other commentary - titled "Tin Foil Hat Brigade" - with the input of, "Utter silliness," I ask the following: Why is it "utter silliness"? If it is, certainly you have reasons for stating so. It would be interesting to know just why exactly. Rejecting without reason is virtually useless, making such commentary just as valuable.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:Russia & China are Allied   4/1/2006 9:05:01 PM
If Russia and China were so close, Russia would not be holding back oil exports. After that big "huff and puff" summit with Putin, China only got some wavering gaurantees at a spur off of the main line going to Japan.
 
Quote    Reply

PARATROOP    RE:Russia & China are Allied   5/1/2006 10:53:03 PM
china is doing some big actions in securing its oil rights for the future..all very intresting, still a hell of a fish story but...possible.but can a plan of such magnitude survive the test of time and the greed of leaders who followed since the plans inital design and implementation???
 
Quote