1. Russias Alert Status. Russia going on alert -- is now viewed as business as usual. Cant agree more. Now my little Andy why would this be considered as BAU? Could it be because they do it so often, for the past thirty years? Auxiliary question: Do you think that the US carries out these activities?

2. Mock attacks. In the past two years, Russia has engaged in numerous mock attacks against the United States, including nuclear attacks. Russia carries out mock attacks, and has for the past thirty years. This goes hand in hand with number 1. You carry out these attacks, (why?) to exercise your personnel and procedures. Do you stay on alert? No, because? (Andy now youre smart enough to answer this. I leave it as an exercise to the student) Auxiliary question: do you think that the US carries out these activities?

3. Russia is stockpiling food in the midst of a supposed "famine Nothing to do with nuclear exchange.

5. Russia has been slaughtering its herds. Nothing to do with nuclear exchange.

6. Russia is hoarding oil. Nothing to do with nuclear exchange. 7. Russia is moving its strategic nuclear weapons from land to sea. This is perhaps the dumbest thing said. Andy, do you actually believe that the military can take a ballistic missile and put it on any launcher, be it air, land or sea? Andy do you know the technical retrofit needed to do this, if it can be done at all? Do you know the size of these missiles? How you ever tried to fit a square peg into a round hole? In addition, land and air based weapons have their place in a nuclear exchange. Exercise for the student: why would they have developed land and air based missiles if they find that sea based missiles is the way to go? Hint: List the advantages for each different basing strategy.

8. Russia is hoarding gold. Nothing to do with nuclear exchange.

9. Russia has openly entered into an alliance with China and is increasingly working with other totalitarian powers hostile to the US. Question for the student: Can you name times during the past thirty years when Russia (then Soviet Union) worked with other countries against the US? Can you recall the Cuban missile crisis? Andy, my little one, I bet you can come up with other examples too. So our enemies are joining forces. Exercise for the student: How long does it take for allies to work out the details of their union? How long before they can show the world the cohesiveness of their bonds? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this union? How does Russia turn this union into a win for them against the US? Hint: you will need to know what it takes to go to war, economically, socially, and militarily.

the US has regarded China as an important ally in containing Russian expansion What is false about this statement? How would the US use this ally to contain Russia, knowing that China was not our true ally? Hint: last time I looked our allies didnt have nukes targeted in our direction and used spy tactics to steal our weapons technology. Exercise for the student: Why do we support our enemies with aid and trade? Why would we play nice. It has something to do with politics and making strange bed fellows.

10. Russias Nuclear War Bunkers. When did the governments (ours and theirs) start building underground facilities? In 1997, the Washington Times reported that a CIA report detailed the vast underground network includes a subway from the Kremlin directly to facilities in the Ural Mountains. If the Cold War is really over and Russia is our friend, why have they built this enormous system of shelters? Because it was not just built.

11. Russia has a sophisticated anti-ballistic missile system. They also have lots of other weapon systems. What does that mean? They are ready to attack. Were they always ready to attack? You bet.

Now on to another point about doomer logic:

On February 21, 1997, then Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin "was at the Odinstovo nuclear command center, overseeing an exercise whose assignment was to destroy the US in less than an hour, according to a press account in Segodnya. And another quote: In July of 1998, the commander-in-chief of Russias navy announced -- as widely reported in the Russian press -- that the Russian military was moving a huge number of their total land-based, strategic nuclear weapons onto naval ships, where they will be much less vulnerable to attack or counter-attack. Previously, the Russian navy only controlled 30 percent of Russias strategic nuclear weapons. That number will dramatically increase to 50 percent under the new plan.

Now why are doomers so quick to believe something from the Segodnya and the Russian press, yet when an American company says were X% done on Y2K, they need proof. They need verification or need to see the actual test data. (Data which they wouldnt understand even if theyre translated into laymens terms).

-- maria (anon@ymous.com), August 14, 1999

Answers

Naner Naner Naner........

-- It's (All@Conspiracy.com), August 14, 1999.

Maria,

Gee, it looks like you are really working on this one! Kinda chewing on it real good here. Is there a real question in that posting or is that just a sharing of some of your free-association thinking lately?

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), August 14, 1999.

Maria

You live in a fantasy world. It's a very safe one.

Why don't you take a walk through Compton or East Los some night, say around 11.30 or so? Let us know if the neighborhood is Y2K compliant. I'm certain in your safe little mind, it is.

Unfortunately for you we live in the real world.

I have a close relative who does business in Russia on a regular basis. In the best of times, he arrives by plane and is greeted at the runway by a caravan of machine gun armed guards. These guards work for the men he is there to see. They give him a personal firearm for him to carry while he is there on business. They escort him to the hotel which has former KGB and GRU stationed outside all heavily armed. They never leave the hotel except to go to a restaurant owned by our friends over there. The restaurant too is gaurded by some nasty looking boys with lots of guns.

This is seen as the normal operating procedure over there. It prevents him from being killed by people who are not as friendly as you and I.

A friend of my relative was recently shot to death in Moscow on business. My relative no longer goes to Russia, he stopped going about 3 months ago because it was no longer safe.

My point here is that you don't know shit about the real world. You live in a world of articles and theories. They don't really count Maria.

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), August 14, 1999.

To Gordon from Gordon,

Amen, Amen. She just doesn't know what life is like in the down and dirty areas, or how far some will go to enforce their own way of doing things. The whole Kosovo fiasco was a "power play" by NATO/USA in that area for reasons that have virtually nothing to do with the publicly stated ones. Tensions, and hatreds are running at a fever pitch right now in many areas of the world, not least of which is Russia. Hell, there are whole sections of Philadelphia, near where I live, that will stand your hair straight up even in the daytime. I would never venture into there at night, on foot, unless I was just plain tired of living.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), August 14, 1999.

I'm sorry Maria but I've known you in cyber-space long enough to have formed an accurate opinion of you and your "theories".

I'm sorry to have to say this but you are one of the most clueless people on this forum - whether it be technical, in the remediation sense, geo-political, in the potential for war sense, or psychological, in the propensity for major rioting/looting/murder/mayhem when the shit hits the fan and Joe average realises he's on his own and gubbmint has lied lied lied to him all the way to the river...

Furthermore you have no grasp about y2k on the world stage - you don't understand JIT, the interconnectedness of EVERYTHING you care to think about, trade, communications, oil, media.

I could go on but I'm wasting my time with you.

If others in your branch of the military are indeed as clueless and arrogant as you then we are indeed in a whole heap of merde...

over to you now Maria,

please feel free to insert your size 11 in your gob once again...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 14, 1999.

Gordon, I grew up on the streets of Philadelphia. I got caught in the middle of many riots. I watch a man get shot right in front of my house. I saw a girl's hair get set on fire on the bus ride home from school. Is that training enough for you?

The other Gordon, I've studied Russian culture and nuclear military tatics in the Air force. And I also am a Y2K project manager for MCI. Want to compare what you know with what I know about MCI?

Andy, I'm really impressed that you think so little of me. That means so much coming from someone arrested after a drunken stuper, crying about it all weekend long in a jail cell. Two beer, one arrest, the smallest cell.

But isn't that the way with doomers; always discussing things they have no clue about. I on the other hand only discuss topics I have experience in. Tell me Andy, you can understand JIT based on what experience you have? Have you run any companies directly involved in JIT? Though any time you talk about the best beer, I'll listen.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 14, 1999.

Maria, I appreciate your posts, because you have facts. Unfortunately, you lack Wisdom. If the above was a rebuttal, I'm still waiting for the rebuttin". But the "two beers, one arrest...etc." was great. That's why we love Andy, 'cuz he's real, and he's willing to look it right in the face.

-- AmazedatthePollymindset (facts@coupledwithWisdom.com), August 14, 1999.

God, Maria, you are surely one of the aces of all time. You should look up Stephen Poole, figure a way to get close to him, and live happily ever after. MCI huh? Doing real great there huh? No wonder we are looking at so many programmer errors. You are an error! Lived in Philadelphia, saw all that bad stuff, and couldn't connect it? You are a prime example of disconnect, if ever there was one. If you didn't have that big ego of yours you'd be total vaporware.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), August 14, 1999.

"And I also am a Y2K project manager for MCI."

I rest my case.

As for me getting arrested in Orange County and spending the best part of two days in Jail for having a few beers and WALKING home...

Well it seems that in Orange County, anyone WALKING on the streets at 01.45 am is a CRIMINAL and SHOULD BE ARRESTED :)

Sorry Maria, nice try, would you like to hear about my other adventures in saudi Arabia, France, Germany et al.

I am a gold mine of information on the jails of the world... :)

I still maintain that you manage to insert your petite size 11 in your ...

oh... fuggggheddabout it

you are a waste of space

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 14, 1999.

Thank GOD that I don't work for LDDS-Metromedia anymore. Now known as MCIWorldcom after the MCI buy-out.

-- (cannot-say@this.time), August 14, 1999.

Remember this quote Maria?

"Andy: I can tell you for sure that Russia is already toast. Y2K won't make that much difference. Communism kept their economy a secret for decades. They were always on the edge of collapse....

Troll Maria, January 4, 1999

http://www.greenspun.com/bboardq-and-a-fetch-msg-tcl?msg_id=000N31

-- archive roamer (archiveroamer@archiveroamer.com), August 14, 1999.

Maria,

I don't frequent the forum as much as I used to; therefore, you may or may not remember me. I've asked you a few technical questions in the past out of doubt of your expertise. None have been answered. I'll keep it simple this time. In this thread you wrote:

8. Russia is hoarding gold. Nothing to do with nuclear exchange.

Ok, Russia is hoarding gold and it has nothing to do with nuclear exchange. If Russia is strapped for cash, why ARE they hoarding gold?

-- MoVe Immediate (MVI@yepimhere.com), August 14, 1999.

Hey Maria, looks like your buddies in the military have dropped the ball again [actually, I doubt it, Taiwan is gonna be sacrificed...]

HK Paper Says War Imminent - US Military Sees No Signs

http://www.insidechina.com/news.php3?id=85252

8-14-99

HONG KONG (Agence France Presse) - Military conflict in the Taiwan Strait could erupt at any moment, a Beijing-backed Hong Kong newspaper reported in front-page headlines Friday.

But with China's military preparations virtually impossible to verify, observers all face the same problem. The challenge is determining whether there is any truth behind the daily front page reports in Hong Kong newspapers or whether they,re part of China's psychological warfare after Taiwan's President Lee Teng-hui demanded "special state-to-state relations" with the mainland.

There have been several reports of a military buildup on the Chinese coast facing Taiwan. But the U.S. Defense department said Thursday it had no information of any concentration in Fujian province.

The Wen Wei Po newspaper on Friday had a front-page pictures of a tank on a navy landing vessel and helicopters and ships taking part in drills. But there was no explanation of where they were.

The newspaper quoted Yan Zhao, a senior researcher at China's Academy of Military Science, as saying that tension in the Taiwan Strait was "more serious" now than in 1996 when China staged military drills off Taiwan after Lee made a visit to the United States.

"It will not be the same now, since he has hit the bottom line," Yan was quoted as saying. He warned that military conflict could erupt at any time as China was well-prepared.

"Our forces in sea, on land, and air have already made good preparations," he said.

Yan also said Beijing would not stop using force even if the United States was to intervene, referring to past history when Chinese and U.S. troops fought against each other in the Korean War.

China has kept up a propaganda barrage in recent weeks to press Lee to back down from his statement that ties with the mainland are on a "state-to-state" basis.

Hong Kong newspapers have also given prominent coverage of the China- Taiwan war of nerves.

The Hong Kong Economic Times said this week the Chinese authorities have deployed more fighters and bombers in the eastern coastal region, including 27 Soviet-built Su-27 fighters.

The South China Morning Post citing a Beijing source said China's People's Liberation Army was considering the invasion and temporary occupation of an outlying island held by Taipei.

Pro-China sources believed the daily media stories of the mainland's war readiness were part of the psychological war intended to "create panic" in Taiwan.

Taiwan's defense ministry has also made similar accusations.

China has repeatedly said it might use force to stop Taiwan attempting to make a formal split with the mainland, which has considered the nationalist island a renegade province since the two split at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. ((c) 1999 Agence France Presse)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 14, 1999.

is china mentioned, in LAST DAY,S =PROPHECY? ANSWER=YES.called the kings of the east.1 million-man army marches. will be anhialated in last battle.CLUE=study bible prophecy-wether you are christian or NOT. then check out the FACT that archeology=proves the HISTORY , of the bible. want to know the future? consult the 1 who makes the future.

-- clue-man. (dogs@zianet.com), August 14, 1999.

Maria says: "Frankly, I don't know about foreign progress on Y2K. Do you? Do you know for a fact that those countries are behind? I only deal with facts, not some Milne or North scenario...Maria, July 26, 1999 http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0018ku

Wow Maria, for someone who claims to be an "expert on Russia and foreign Y2K," your very quotes prove you are ignorant. Do you want to stop now or should I dig up some more of your embarrassing "expert" quotes?

-- archive roamer (archive roamer@archiveroamer.com), August 14, 1999.

Where's Anita, the rule keeper when you need her? You're breaking the rules of disinformation. Hey Gordon twins, you know nothing about me expect what you read in the last few weeks. Now are you going to comment on the topic of this thread or just continue to bash me.

Archive, don't take things out of context. That thread dealt with telecomm. Please read the entire thread. Also if you do more digging you'll find my experience with Russian military capabilities and also this:

Big Toe thanks for your take on the telecomm thread. I want to expand that somewhat to focus on commercial communication satellites in particular. Im not saying that milsatcom isnt important but 1) the general population doesnt use military sats, 2) military sats are more complex because of the mission requirements, and 3) we cant discuss their design on the web. I did a little digging from my classes to confirm what I had said in the previous post. Let me give my take on these satellites.

First, commsats are in geo orbits. For those of you who know what this means you can skip this paragraph. These sats move some 23,000 miles above the earth. They move according to the laws of physics, just as the moon has for billions of years. The geo orbits are circular, meaning their velocity is constant as opposed to elliptical orbits where the velocity changes depending on the position. I bring out this fact because of the solar panels to be discussed later. These sats picked this altitude because they must have the same view of the earth at all times. Its period is the same as the earth rotation, slightly less than 24 hours. (I bet you didnt know that did you?) If you look up, you see the same satellite in the same position no matter what hour, minute, second, or year it is on earth. This fact is important because the ground stations will not have the problem that Big Toe mentioned in the other thread. Ground stations can acquire the sat at any time needed.

Second, satellites have two basic subsystems: payload and spacecraft bus. As I mentioned in the earlier thread, the payload contains an antenna. The design of these payloads date back to 1945, very simple technology. (Opinion: my knowledge is a decade old, so things may have become more complex. But, the designers first rule is keep it simple. With increased complexity, risk increases. Space operations is too costly to increase the risk needlessly. Satellite owners do not need additional risk.) The antenna receives and transmits data, nothing more. The payload also amplifies the signal. (Opinion: I dont know about embedded chips in this type of payload but from what Ive read, embedded chips are not needed. This is a passive design. And why risk it?)

The spacecraft bus contains the attitude control, propulsion, power, and telemetry systems. Attitude control comes from either a momentum wheel or a satellite spin. The satellites that use the momentum wheel, generally use solar panels. The momentum wheel may have a circuit to ensure that it keeps spinning to maintain attitude. But the laws of motion in a space environment tend to keep the thing spinning. (I cant say if they have embedded chips that may fail). The solar panels have a drive mechanism which keep them oriented toward the sun. They perform one revolution during the satellite period at a constant velocity. (I cant talk about that mechanism but it shouldnt be any more complicated than the small hand on your clock). In the dual-spin system, solar cells are place all over the satellite, so they are oriented toward the sun at all times. These kinds of satellites look like spinning cylinders with antenna sticking out the top. I feel these are more complex because the antennae need to be separated from the spinning body. That mechanism may fail (cant say for sure). The power system on both kinds includes batteries for operations during an eclipse which occurs for 1.5 hours each day. Telemetry is needed for battery conditioning and other health maintenance. These routine functions could be performed in December 99 to ensure entering the new year will not cause any additional problems.

I tried to simplify the satellite design and functioning to help you understand. But, the facts mentioned do highlight major functions. True, the devil is in the details but how much detail do you really want? Now draw your own conclusions about whether or not telecomm satellites will fail. Comments Big Toe?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 09, 1999

MVI, Good question. I don't know why they would be hoarding gold (assuming it's actually true). It may have increased in value during times of war but things have changed since that first NUDET and last war. Speculation is just that and I won't associate it with a Russian attack.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 15, 1999.

So what about your other ten howlers?

You don't understand the significance of any of them?

I'm truly amazed...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

Hello Maria:

"Anita the rule keeper" here. Wondering why you needed to repost an entire post from January that had no bearing whatsoever on the discussion. Maybe you could pare it down to something substantial?

And also wondering when you, who said, "And I also am a Y2K project manager for MCI. Want to compare what you know with what I know about MCI?" -- STILL have no explanation for the HUGE MCI problems that are going on.

Oh well. Maybe you're too busy getting caught in the middle of another one of the "many Philadelphia riots".

-- Anita Evangelista (ale@townsqr.com), August 15, 1999.

The Russians couldn't even make a good showing of themselves when attacking Afghanistan.

The Russians can't even afford to pay their troops.

The Russians lost a great deal of their nuclear arsenal and one major seaport(primarily to The Ukraine and Georgia), in the break-up of the Soviet Union.

To attack anyone bigger than say Belgium, would only highlight that they have lost their super-power standing - a disgrace that I'm sure they would very much like to avoid.

If the Russians really felt up to a fight with us, it would have already happened. They took an exceedingly dim view of the recent events in Yugoslavia, and did nothing more than sabre-rattle, and some pretty feeble sabre-rattling, at that.

The Russians have their collective mouths so firmly glommed onto the World Bank tit right now, that if anything caused a severance of said mouth-to-mammary connection, the Russian economy would plunge into such chaos, that I doubt they would even notice even if Y2K ended up being a 10x10

If Yeltsin thinks that a war with the U.S., at this juncture, is a rational undertaking, then alcoholism is the least of his problems.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), August 15, 1999.

Bokonon:

Just wondering which previous wars you believe were "rational undertakings"? Seems to me that most wars I've ever heard of were pretty *emotional* undertakings....and we know how predictable emotions can be....

-- Anita Evangelista (Ale@townsqr.com), August 15, 1999.

Bok,

all due respect - I get the impression that you haven't, uh, studied this subject...

Ever read Stratfor? Did you read all the Nyquist articles? are you calling Nyquist a liar? And Lunev? A liar too? Ruddy? A liar?

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

Maria,

I've been watching you post for a long time, and you've said a lot of things that have caused me to question whether you really know what you're talking about. Maybe you do, in some few areas. But the following quote tells me that you have no idea what you're talking about here:

"Russia is moving its strategic nuclear weapons from land to sea." This is perhaps the dumbest thing said. Andy, do you actually believe that the military can take a ballistic missile and put it on any launcher, be it air, land or sea? Andy do you know the technical retrofit needed to do this, if it can be done at all? Do you know the size of these missiles?"

Maria, do you really think that the Russians would move the entire missile to a naval vessel? (BTW, that's a rhetorical question. I can tell from your comments above that, in fact, you do think that). If the Russians are moving their nuclear weapons onto ships, then they are moving just the nuclear warheads, and not the entire missile, onto a naval-launched platform (i.e., another missile).

Now that I think about it, reading and responding to this thread has been a total waste of my time. Maybe we should both use better judgment before we post anything, huh Maria?

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), August 15, 1999.

A long term Soviet deception strategy is now in its final phase.

The Russian Strategic Rocket Forces are on permanent alert. This gives them a position from which to launch a surprise attack.

"There is profound error and harm in the disoriented claims of bourgeois ideologues that there will be no victor in a thermonuclear war."

-A.S. Milovidov, Russian Military Theorist

"The principle of the employment of nuclear weapons in combination with other means of destruction follows from the fact that it is impossible to destroy all varied objectives on the battlefield with nuclear weapons alone. It is believed that nuclear weapons, as the main means of destruction, will be employed only for the destruction of the most important objectives; all other targets are neutralized and destroyed by the artillery, aviation, and the fire of tanks and other weapons."

-Colonel A.A. Sidorenko, Soviet Strategist

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when we are far away, we must make him believe we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."

-Sun Tzu

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

"The rapid deployment of the [intercontinental] missile is due to its extremely advantageous characteristics. This weapon has unlimited range, enormous speed and high trajectory, great accuracy and maneuver of fire, and can carry a nuclear warhead of any yeild. Ballistic missiles, employed en masse, are still practically invulnerable to existing means of air defense, and their employment is almost independent of weather conditions."

-- Soviet Military Strategy , p. 298.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"For the Soviet strategist nuclear war is not merely an exchange of nuclear strikes, but a military operation involving huge masses of infantry, tanks, and ships. The key to victory in such operations is: exploit, exploit, and again, exploit. The idea is to use one's missiles to make huge holes in the enemy. Next: move rapidly through those holes before the victim can recover."

-- Origins of the Fourth World War, p. 201

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"The assertion that nuclear war will not be a continuation of politics is completely fallacious."

-- Colonel General Makhmut Al. Gareev

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"The Armed Forces of the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries must be prepared above all to wage war under conditions of the mass use of nuclear weapons by both belligerent parties."

-- M. I. Cherednichenko

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"If the attack succeeds in destroying the defender with the very first nuclear volley, he will no longer be able to offer resistance to the attacker with either nuclear or conventional weapons."

-- Colonel A. A. Sidorenko

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"Preemption in launching a nuclear strike is considered the decisive condition for the attainment of superiority over him and the seizure and retention of the initiative."

-- Colonel A. A. Sidorenko

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"Not only the enemy's armed forces, but also the sources of his military power, the important economic centers, and also points of military and state control as well as the areas where different branches of armed forces are based, will be subjected to simultaneous destruction."

-- Colonel M. Shirokov

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"The Soviet strategic literature indicates that chemical and biological agents will be used against 'unsalvageable' populations, even after they have been disorganized and disarmed. As the Communists define it, an unsalvageable population is thoroughly and irredeemably bourgeois. Such people are past the point of benefitting from any sort of re-education. Therefore, all unsalvageables will be subject to a Kremlin-inspired 'Final Solution,' probably by way of biological attacks."

-- Origins of the Fourth World War, p. 205

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"The Soviet leaders have estimated that they might lose between 5% and 8% of their population in a war. They would not mind 20% casualties if victory was assured. Remember: It does not matter how you play the game -- as long as you win."

-- Origins of the Fourth World War, p. 211

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

"The East European satellites were first brought into the Soviet long- range planning process in 1967. Guidelines for developing a coordinated plan were provided to all satellite countries for their use in what would be a major two-year planning process. The plan explained what the Soviets believed the arms control process would accomplish, and how the process could be exploited by the Kremlin in its various stages. To the extent possible, these stages were matched to the phases of predicted major global strategic changes around which the long-range plan was structured....The final phase, the period of social democratic peace, was expected to be the longest and the most difficult. It is important to recognize that this process was not viewed by the Soviets as a 'straight line'; rather, they conceived of it as a 'zigzag' consisting of a series of advances, setbacks, and pauses.

"The major issue revolved around how to design arms control agreements so that the United States and other NATO nations would ultimately be compelled to eliminate their own strategic weapons, while the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries would be able to retain enough of their strategic forces to tilt the global balance of power in their favor." (Jan Sejna's essay, found in Why the Soviets Violate Arms Control Treaties, by Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., p. 129.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Communist Leaders in the "Former" Soviet Republics?

Azerbaijan ---- KGB General Gaidar Aliyev, Communist Party First Secretary

Belarus ---- Vyacheslav Kebic, Belorussian Communist Party and CPSU Central Committee

Georgia ---- MVD General Eduard Shevardnadze, First Secretary of the Georgian Communist Party

Kazakhstan ---- Nursultan Nazarbayev, USSR Politburo member and Kazakh Communist leader

Kyrgyzstan ---- Askar Akayev, Kyrgyzstan Communist Party Central Committee section chief

Latvia ---- Valdis Birkavs, Communist Party secretary

Lithuania ---- Algirdas Brazauskas, First Secretary of the Lithuanian Communist Party

Moldova ---- Mircea Snegur, CPSU Central Committee member and Moldavia ideology chief

Russia ---- Boris Yeltsin, non-voting member of Communist Party Soviet Union Politburo

Tajikistan ---- Rakhmon Nabiyev, Tajik Communist Party boss

Turkmenistan ---- Saparmurat Niyazov, First Secretary of the Turkmen Communist Party

Ukraine ---- Leonid Kuchma, Former Communist director of a Soviet missile plant

Uzbekistan ---- Islam Karimov, First Secretary of the Uzbek Communist Party

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack. Our time will come in thirty or forty years. To win, we shall need the element of surprise. The Western world will need to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There shall be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate to their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist." Dmitrii Z. Manuilskii (Lenin School of Political Warfare, Moscow, 1931)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"The suggested European option would be promoted by a revival of controlled 'democratization' on the Czechoslovak pattern in Eastern Europe, including probably Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union....Brezhnev's successor may well appear to be a kind of Soviet Dubcek. The succession will be important only in a presentational sense. The reality of collective leadership and the leaders' common commitment to the long-range policy will continue unaffected. Conceivably an announcement will be made to the effect that the economic and political foundations of communism in the Soviet Union have been laid and that democratization is therefore possible. This would provide the framework for the introduction of a new set of 'reforms.'

"The Brezhnev regime and its neo-Stalinistic actions against 'dissidents' and in Afghanistan would be condemned as Novotny's regime was condemned in 1968. In the economic field reforms might be expected to bring Soviet practice more into line with Yugoslav, or even, seemingly, with Western socialist models. Some economic ministries might be dissolved; control would be more decentralized; individual self-managing firms might be created from existing plants and factories; material incentives would be increased; the independent role of technocrats, workers' councils, and trade unions would be enhanced; the party's control over the economywould be apparently diminished. Such reforms would be based on Soviet experience in the 1920s and 1960s, as well as on Yugoslav experience. The party would be less conspicuous, but would continue to control the economy from behind the scenes as before. The picture being deliberately painted now of stagnation and deficiencies in the Soviet economy should be seen as part of the preparation for deceptive innovations; it is intended to give the innovations greater impact on the West when they are introduced.

"Political 'liberalization' and 'democratization' would follow the general lines of the Czechoslovak rehearsal in 1968. This rehearsal might well have been the kind of political experiment Mironov had in mind as early as 1960. The 'liberalization' would be spectacular and impressive. Formal pronouncements might be made about a reduction in the communist party's role; its monopoly would be apparently curtailed. An ostensible separation of powers between the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary might be introduced. The Supreme Soviet would be given greater apparent power and the president and deputies greater apparent independence. The posts of president of the Soviet Union and first secretary of the party might well be separated. The KGB would be 'reformed.' Dissidents at home would be amnestied; those in exile abroad would be allowed to return, and some would take up positions of leadership in government. Sakharov might be included in some capacity in the government or allowed to teach abroad. The creative arts and cultural and scientific organizations, such as the writers' unions and Academy of Sciences, would become apprently more independent, as would the trade unions. Political clubs would be opened to nonmembers of the communist party. Leading dissidents might form one or more alternative political parties. Censorship would be relaxed; controversial books, plays, films, and art would be published, performed, and exhibited. Many prominent Soviet performing artists now abroad would return to the Soviet Union and resume their professional careers. Constitutional amendments would be adopted to guarantee fulfillment of the provisions of the Helsinki agreements and a semblance of compliance would be maintained. There would be greater freedom for Soviet citizens to travel. Western and United Nations observers would be invited to the Soviet Union to witness the reforms in action.

"But, as in the Czechoslovak case, the 'liberalization' would be calculated and deceptive in that it would be introduced from above. It would be carried out by the party through its cells and individual members in government, the Supreme Soviet, the courts, and the electoral machinery and by the KGB through its agents among the intellectuals and scientists. It would be the culmination of Shelepin's plans. It would contribute to the stabilization of the regime at home and to the achievement of its goals abroad." -- Anatoliy Golitsyn, 1984, New Lies for Old, pp. 339- 40..

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

The Institute for Policy Studies is a think tank associated with Bill and Hillary Clinton. From the ranks of this organization, President Clinton has made several appointments.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"[IPS] is described as a Washington-based 'Think-Factory' which helped train extremists who incite violence in the United States...and whose educational research serves as a cover for intrigue and political agitation." (FBI File 175-398, June 9, 1976 message traffic, p. 8.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

In late 1969 Mr. Clinton traveled alone to Moscow in the dead of winter. He spent forty days behind the iron curtain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"Individuals who have been identified as CP [Communist Party] members...have participated in IPS functions. IPS representatives have also affiliated with known communists." (FBI File 100-447935, Vol. 1, March 14, 1969, p. 1.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

During the Vietnam War, while a student at Oxford, Bill Clinton led anti-American protests in support of the Vietnamese Communists.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"IPS apparently exercises considerable influence in the New Left movement and may have as its goal the destruction of the U.S. Government...." (FBI File 100-447935, Vol. 3, Confidential Memo July 8, 1971.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

IPS was formed in 1963. The lion's share of the money for IPS came from the Samuel Rubin Foundation. Rubin was an active Communist who participated in the Bolshevik Revolution. After coming to America he worked closely with Armand Hammer, a long-time agent of Soviet communism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"...[IPS] gives activists access to Government secrets as well as the opportunity to influence opinions and political developments.... Obviously the institute is in a position to infiltrate persons into Government agencies who are indoctrinated in revolutionary ideology.... They constitute the new United Front with penetration in depth by communists.... In effect...[IPS Director Arthur Waskow's] outline is an entire framework of a shadow government with shadow institutions." (FBI File 100-447935, Vol. 1, Secret Report of March 14, 1969, pp. 46-7.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Vice President Gore's family, over a period of more than twenty years, received financial consideration from communist agent Armand Hammer, including hundreds of thousands in royalties from a zinc mine which didn't exist....

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"...An IPS working paper captioned 'Proposal for a Five-Year Plan for Radical Reconstruction'...is said to delineate...the radicalization of U.S. society through the creation of counterstructures.... It was further denoted..... 'These individuals [are instructed that they] must work from within the establishment but, while doing so, not to lose sight of their basic radical beliefs'."(FBI File 100-447935, Vol. 3, Secret Report of June 10, 1971, pp. 1-2.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Congressman Ron Dellums, who led the House Armed Services Committee in the early days of the first Clinton Administration, is an openly avowed Marxist. IPS member Derek Shearer, another avowed Marxist, is one of President Clinton's closest friends and advisors.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"This investigation is based upon information which indicates that the captioned organization [IPS] is engaged in activities which could involve violations of Title 18, U.S.C. 2387 [Sedition], 793 [Espionage], 2101 [Antiriot Laws], and Title 50, U.S.C. 781-798 [Internal Security Act of 1950 and the Communist Control Act of 1954]." (FBI File 100-447935 Vol. 6, August 24, 1973 Report.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Clinton's first National Security Advisor, Anthony Lake, served as an IPS instructor and worked with Cuban spy Orlando Letelier on IPS projects.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

"IPS leaders...support...disruptive demonstrations and advocacy of abolition of the FBI, Secret Service, other Government intelligence agencies and the military." (FBI File 100-447935, Vol. 3, Internal Security Memo of April 29, 1971, p. 1.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Hillary Clinton supported the FMLN communist rebels in El Salvador, giving $5,000 to its main front organization, CISPES.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. -- Article III, Section 3, of the United States Constitution

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

President Clinton has consistently worked for the destruction of America's military power. He opposes civil defense and ABM defense. He favors measures amounting to the unilateral disarmament of the United States. In addition, he has allowed Red Chinese front companies to obtain control of strategic ports, including the ports of entry on either side of the Panama Canal.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

Analysis: Russia Mobilizes, America Sleeps

J.R. Nyquist and Christopher Ruddy

April 8, 1999

LONDON AND WASHINGTON -- Bill Clinton's use of NATO forces to bomb Yugoslavia could trigger global war. Over the weekend, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji hinted that the crisis in Kosovo could lead to a world war. At the same time, Russia -- a long-time ally of the Serbs -- has begun a large-scale mobilization of its military forces.

While NATO countries are engaging in military operations, not one Western country is mobilizing for a larger war, as is Russia.

THE NEW STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP OF RUSSIA AND CHINA

NATO's soporific reaction to Russia's mobilization should also be viewed, not in the context of the Yugoslavia bombing, but in the broader context of the new China-Russia relationship -- one that has dramatically altered the balance of power in the world.

In November 1998, Russia and China officially formed a "strategic partnership." According to the official Chinese news agency, this partnership is meant to challenge the "perceived global dominance of the U.S." In plain English, the primary enemy Russia and China plan to fight is the United States and its allies.

Together, Russia and China have the world's most powerful military, including over 30,000 nuclear weapons, armies of 6 million men with hundreds of battle-ready combat divisions, and thousands of tanks. Their new alliance should have rung warning bells throughout the world. Instead the Western media, Clinton and other Western leaders have ignored it, continuing to insist that Russia and China are our "friends."

WHILE CLINTON DIDDLES, RUSSIA AND CHINA PREPARE FOR WAR

In recent months, Russia and China have jointly demilitarized their 2,500-mile border. Three hundred Russian combat units were withdrawn from the Chinese frontier. A similar number of Chinese units were withdrawn.

China has also been rapidly building up its ballistic missile forces opposite Taiwan -- forces that could be used against the U.S. military in the Far East. An attack against Taiwan could come at any time. Carl Ford of the Heritage Foundation, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 25, said that the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) has changed its military strategy from one of a slowly-developed assault and blockade against Taiwan, to "more intense, quick-hitting attacks using ballistic missiles."

For many years, Russian military theory has held that ballistic missile weapons can be used to accelerate attacks, allowing for rapid victories over powerful opponents. The Chinese missile buildup together with its shift in military strategy suggests that China's generals have fallen under the spell of Russian military theory.

At the same time, the Russian units moved off the Chinese border are now free to threaten Europe.

As the NATO bombing began, Russia talked of moving heavy bombers and tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus, the traditional invasion route from Russia to Europe.

Still, NATO is oblivious to the tremendous shift in the global balance of power caused by the new Russia-China military alliance.

NORTH KOREA JOINS THE RUSSIA-CHINA AXIS

There are strong indications that the Russia-China alliance also includes other sworn enemies of the West, including the North Korean military dictatorship. During the Korean War, tens of thousands of Chinese troops fought against the US in support of the North Korean dictatorship, and China continues to be North Korea's principal ally. It is virtually unthinkable that the North Koreans would launch a new war against South Korea or the West without Chinese approval and support.

In the past year, North Korea has become increasingly bellicose, repeatedly threatening to launch nuclear weapons against US cities if we interfere with their activities on the Korean peninsula. In just the last month, Korea has also deployed a new three-stage missile capable of hitting most US cities.

A major obstacle in any war launched by North Korea is America's ally, Japan. According to the nationally circulated Japanese newspaper Sankei, on March 23, North Korea used a naval diversion to cover the insertion "dozens" of special operations commandos into Japan. According to unidentified sources, these North Korean infiltrators are trained in the sabotage of trains, bridges, and communications.

Such a move by the North Koreans could mean that an attack by North Korea against the South is imminent.

AMERICAN FORCES SPREAD THIN AND VULNERABLE TO RUSSIAN OR CHINESE AGGRESSION

The bulk of front-line American combat troops are now dispersed abroad. As the Balkans conflict escalates even further with the likely introduction of NATO ground forces, the West is ill prepared to defend South Korea, Taiwan, or even America.

The NATO blitz against Yugoslavia is already sapping U.S. military strength needed in the Middle East to check Saddam Hussein. If war were to intensify in the Balkans, or if war broke out in Korea, with our current commitment in Iraq, America doesn't have the resources to cope.

The logic of this is apparent to our enemies, and could well be exploited to inflict a major defeat on American forces in one or two hot spots simultaneously.

Still, the main threat to America is Russia, which now has more nuclear weapons than every other nation on earth combined.

For the past three months NewsMax.com has been sounding the alarm about growing war preparations against the West by a new Russia/China axis. The very timing of the Russian-Chinese alliance -- when U.S. forces are at a low -- is extremely ominous.

But the establishment media has ignored this story. Now NATO's attack against Yugoslavia has provoked bitter condemnation from Russia and China and the military threat is apparent for all to see.

PREPARING THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE FOR WAR

As we reported in Newsmax.com four months ago, before it would be politically possible for the Russians to launch a war against the West, the Russian people would first have to be psychologically prepared for war. Clinton's war on Yugoslavia has provided precisely the stimulus needed to create massive war hysteria among the Russian people.

Just last Thursday, hundreds of furious Russian demonstrators marched through Moscow calling for Russia to go to war against NATO. One banner said: "It's time to bomb the military bases of the United States." That banner becomes much more ominous when you realize that the demonstration was either sponsored by the Russian government or at least had its tacit approval.

Equally ominous was the singling out of US military bases, the first strike target in any war against the West, essential for destroying America's retaliatory nuclear capability.

'CLINTON HAS SINGLE-HANDEDLY REVIVED THE COLD WAR'

The sentiment expressed by Russian war protesters isn't just the opinion of a few extremists. A recent opinion survey found that in the wake NATO bombing of their traditional allies, the Serbs, an incredible 64% of all Russians now believe that NATO intends to attack Russia.

Russian officials have also issued increasingly ominous pronouncements against America and the West. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov spoke of "new tasks" for Russia's military. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev likened the crisis to "a whirlpool which is drawing more countries into it." Former Russian Premier Gorbachev said, "Clinton has managed to single-handedly revive the Cold War."

RUSSIA PREPARES FOR WAR

Obsessed with the carnage in Kosovo, NATO appears to be oblivious to the fact Russia has been engaging in a massive military mobilization.

In the two weeks since NATO launched their offensive against Yugoslavia:

The Russian Defense Ministry began an enlarged draft, calling up 168,776 men from the ages of 18 to 27.

Recruited over 60,000 Russian "volunteers" to fight NATO troops in Serbia. On 6 April the first Russian volunteers arrived in the Serbian town of Novi Sad.

Threatened to move tactical nuclear weapons and heavy bombers forward into Belarus -- Russia's highway to NATO.

Dispatched key elements of their Northern fleet, including the aircraft cruiser, Admiral Kuznetsov, and the newly commissioned Peter the Great, the largest ballistic missile cruiser ever built. Vice Admiral Popov, commander of the Northern Fleet told Itar-Tass, the Northern Fleet is "ready to fulfill any order of the supreme command to defend the interests of Russia."

The Northern Fleet has more ballistic missile submarines than the entire U.S. Navy.

On 30 March, Russia sent a battle group of over twenty warships to sea from its Pacific Fleet. Included in the fleet were ground forces from Russia's Far Eastern Military District.

Russia dispatched ships from the Black Sea Fleet -- including a missile cruiser, two anti-submarine warfare frigates, and support ships. A Russian reconnaissance ship has already entered the Mediterranean.

Russian TV displayed pictures of ballistic missiles being loaded on cruisers in the Black Sea.

Russia announced the successful launch of a ballistic missile during exercises of its Northern fleet.

Despite these clear war preparations, Russian news agencies continue to repeat the Big Lie that Russia has no plans to get involved in military action in Yugoslavian war.

If that's true, why all of the war preparations? How have the supposedly "economically desperate" Russians been able to mobilize so many naval ships and combat troops men so quickly?

RUSSIA'S PATTERN OF DECEPTION

Russia's growing preparation for war during the Kosovo crisis suggests a massive pattern of deception, which is being ignored by the clueless Western media and Clinton. This pattern of deception is just the most recent and blatant example of how Russia has been talking peace while preparing for war against the West. How else do you explain this behavior from a friend and ally of America:

Russia continues to maintain the world's largest arsenal of nuclear weapons -- over 30,000 -- the overwhelming majority targeted against the West.

During the past two years, Russia has engaged in several mock nuclear war exercises against the United States. These exercises have included the use of rockets as well as naval and airborne forces to wipe America from the map.

For the past 18 months, Russia has been moving its nuclear weapons onto naval ships. Naval ships are considered to be less vulnerable to retaliation in a nuclear war.

This past December, Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces deployed a regiment of state-of-the-art Topol-M missiles targeted against the West. These missiles are now rolling off Russian production lines and are more sophisticated than anything in America's arsenal.

In January, Russia put is nuclear forces--strategic rockets, naval and air--under a unified command -- essential for a coordinated first strike against the West.

Russia appears to be hoarding food, fuel, gold, and other commodities -- an essential preparation for a major war. Despite claims of poverty and famine, Russia is stockpiling millions of tons of food and urging its people to buy gold. It is interesting to note that the Kosovo crisis began just as the last shipments of billions of dollars of Western food aid reached Russia.

Russia has built the world's largest network of fallout shelters -- complete underground cities, some as large as Washington, DC. WAR PREPARATIONS IN RUSSIA HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS

In order to mobilize their people against the West, and prepare them for the destruction it will bring, Russian leaders know that they must create massive hatred of the West.

The first step occurred during the summer of 1998 when Russia defaulted on their foreign loans resulting in massive bank and business failures, bread lines throughout the country, and incredible suffering.

On the face of it, it made no sense for the Russian government to default, since just weeks before the default, the IMF had given Moscow some $5 billion in new foreign aid. (According to the Wall Street Journal, these funds mysteriously "disappeared into the offshore accounts of Russia's oligarchy.")

Why would any regime in its right mind subject their own people to such massive suffering when they had the resources to prevent it?

The likely answer: Russia's leaders knew that "evil Western capitalists" -- not themselves -- would be blamed. Indeed, as a result of the 1998 Russian economic meltdown, millions of Russians demanded that communism be restored and corrupt Jewish tycoons be sent packing. The Russian economic meltdown, quite possibly engineered by Moscow, was in effect a bloodless coup that did more than any other single event to revive hatred of capitalism, anti- Semitism, and again set Russia on the path of tyranny and confrontation with the West.

CREATING A NEW SOVIET EMPIRE

With Russia's economy in shambles, Russian leaders should have been preoccupied with domestic problems. Instead, the primary focus of Russia's energies and resources has been creating a new Soviet Empire.

Last November, China and Russia announced a new global alliance. Their intelligence services now share information. Their high commands have organized cooperative working groups.

The new Russian-Chinese Alliance represents the greatest shift in the balance of power since World War II, yet the Western press has virtually ignored it.

Chinese leaders speak more and more openly about war with the West. In January Chinese President Jiang Zemin told the People's Liberation Army to get ready for two things: First, nuclear world war; and second, to suppress uprisings inside China.

ANTI-AMERICAN HATRED IS REACHING NEW HEIGHTS

In Russia, the government doesn't have to worry about uprisings. Thanks to Bill Clinton's bombing campaign in Yugoslavia, the Russians have rallied to the Kremlin.

Consider what Clinton has done: For the first time in its history, NATO has attacked a sovereign state, in direct violation of the NATO Charter which forbids an offensive war against other countries.

The result of that attack, encouraged by the American leadership, may well be the collapse of the NATO alliance and the end of American leadership in Western Europe, particularly in Italy and Greece. At the very least, Clinton's use of NATO as an offensive tool of war, has shifted public opinion against the U.S. in Russia, Eastern Europe, and much of the Third World.

Understandably, since both Russia and Serbia are Slavic nations with strong historical, religious and cultural ties, there is real anger among the Russian populace against the NATO bombing. After all, how would Americans feel if Russia bombed London because of the strife in Northern Ireland? Or if Russia bombed Canada or Mexico? NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia proves to the average Russian that NATO is an offensive military organization whose ultimate aim is the destruction of Russia -- which is what they have been told by their leaders for generations.

CLINTON'S WAR AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA: A 'ROYAL GIFT' TO COMMUNISTS AND KREMLIN INSIDERS

The present Russian anger over the NATO bombing is, as Izvestia called it, a "royal gift" to the communists and Kremlin insiders -- some of whom have publicly advocated war with the West. There is growing pressure on even moderate Russian leaders to take "some action" against NATO to restore Russia's glory and pride.

Russia's Duma passed a resolution 366-4 that declares that NATO "aggression" is "a threat to Russia's national security" and called on the Russian government to begin war mobilization. Russia's foreign secretary Igor Ivanov said while Russia had no immediate military plans, it was "holding extreme measures in reserve."

As the Christian Science Monitor reports, Russian nationalists now repeat a mantra, "What is happening in Serbia today, will happen in Russia tomorrow."

Itar-Tass reports that leading Russia intellectuals have formed a new movement called "Against World War III" to combat growing war hysteria in Russia.

RUSSIAN LEADERS CONSIDER NUCLEAR WAR INEVITABLE

Colonel Stanislav Lunev, the highest-ranking GRU officer ever to defect from Russia, has stated that the Russian General Staff considers nuclear war with America to be inevitable.

Lunev writes, "I spent thirty years preparing for war against America. Not a war against China. Not a war against Europe. A war against America."

In an interesting footnote, almost immediately after the NATO bombing campaign began, Russia canceled its cooperation with America on the Y2K computer virus. This cooperation is vital as the year 2000 rapidly approaches, and by rejecting U.S. help suggests the Russians have other plans and have no intention of ever opening up its defense systems to outside technicians -- unlike the US under Clinton, which has allowed Russian and Chinese military agents to roam our top- secret defense labs virtually at will.

'WAG THE DOG' GLOBAL WAR?

As conservative commentator, Lwellen Rockwell, points out, Clinton's foreign policy can be summarized by a single word: Bombs!

Clinton's popularity dips and he bombs Iraq. Ken Starr issues a report recommending that Clinton be impeached, and he bombs Sudan and Afghanistan. The Senate prepares to vote on impeachment charges, and Clinton again bombs Iraq. Chinagate -- Clinton's cynical selling of US military secrets in exchange for campaign contributions -- threatens to break in the popular press, and Clinton bombs Yugoslavia.

As in the movie, "Wag the Dog," whenever Clinton gets in trouble, he bombs someone to distract attention from his own scandals and crimes. Clinton's foreign policy reads like a script for a Hollywood B film.

Personal and political scandals have enveloped Bill Clinton's presidency since his first days in office. Just months after becoming president, he launched a bloody attack on the Branch Davidians in Waco, which ended with the immolation of some 80 innocent men, women and children. He blatantly used the military to "wag the dog" on the eve of the Senate impeachment vote with a cynical bombing of Iraq.

Those who claim that with impeachment behind him, Clinton has no real reason to wag the dog by bombing Yugoslavia, are dead wrong. Supreme egotist that he is, Clinton is consumed with remaining popular and securing his place in history -- both of which are threatened by continuing public attention to previous and newly revealed scandals, like Chinagate. Some of those scandals could even have legally devastating consequences for Clinton and Hillary personally, after his presidency ends.

The Lewinsky scandal continues to percolate, and Monica has been on a high profile book tour. Now a new and very a serious rape allegation hangs over Clinton's head -- and there could be more such allegations forthcoming. New revelations come out almost daily about Clinton's treasonous aid to the Chinese war machine, in exchange for campaign contributions.

Despite Clinton's claims to the contrary, no vital U.S. interests are at stake in Kosovo, and no NATO member have been attacked by Serbia. In fact, by attacking Yugoslavia, Clinton has created precisely the outrages he claimed he was acting to prevent:

Mass murder of Albanian Serbs,

Shoring up the power of the tyrant Milosevic,

Destabilizing surrounding countries,

Expanding the war -- with the introduction of Russian "volunteers"-- beyond Yugoslavia,

Weakening NATO,

Killing of innocent men, women and children in Yugoslavia. Not to mention the flirtation with global war. By wagging the dog with a very hot war in Europe, Clinton has managed -- for now -- to bury growing accusations of treason against him. Clinton may go down in history as the first US President willing to risk -- or cause -- global war to ensure his own popularity.

HOW CLINTON IS PUSHING RUSSIA TOWARDS WAR

The Russian people view the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as almost a direct attack on their nation. American refusals to allow Russia to broker a peaceful settlement have lead to further Russian war hysteria.

As the American-lead assault began, the Russian Prime Minister, Yevgeny Primakov, an old line KGB general, came to Belgrade and hours later had a peace deal. Waving a scrap of paper in his hand he flew to Munich to meet with German Chancellor Schroeder. Germany is NATO's most important continental member. Germany and NATO rejected the offer. Russia, the peacemaker, was rebuffed by the Americans, the aggressors. So hostility grew in Russia.

Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia encourages the most violent, extreme and anti-American factions in Russia. Russia's ailing leader and erstwhile US-friend, Boris Yeltsin, faces his own impeachment vote on April 15th. He too desperately needs to wag the dog to distract attention from his own failures. His status weakened by NATO bombing, only after agreeing to oppose NATO and draft troops for Yugoslavia did Yeltsin partially recover his standing in the polls.

WILL RUSSIA ACTUALLY GO TO WAR WITH THE WEST?

Russian war preparations continue to accelerate.

When the Yugoslav crisis erupted, we were told that Russia's major fleets were going out to sea. A coincidence, the West was told. It has long been theorized that if Russia ever wanted to attack America, it would steer its ballistic missile submarines underneath its surface ships on their way to sea, making it difficult for U.S. sonar to detect the submarine deployment.

Once deployed, the submarines can sink to the bottom of the Atlantic and Pacific, where the can stay for months, quietly waiting for orders from the high command.

Convenience is joined by luck. Russia supposedly has no oil for its ships, one spokesman says. But miraculously, there's suddenly enough oil for its major fleets to engage in extensive maneuvers.

The Russians must have noted that their deployment causes no alarm from the West. After all, Russia is so weak it couldn't harm a fly -- so the thinking goes. Russian spokesmen continually insist they have no plans to engage NATO militarily, but every action suggests a progressive mobilization for war.

So the Russians will continue mobilizing and gaining the advantage as America and the West sleeps. In Russia, hundreds of thousands of troops are called up. It will only take three months for the full conventional weight of the old Soviet Army to be resurrected. It will have five times as many soldiers as the American army.

Russia "has no intention of interfering in the current conflict around Yugoslavia," a government spokesman told Interfax. Meanwhile, Russia's leaders continually talk of war. They hint, they threaten and they mobilize for it.

And good Republicans like Henry Kissinger, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Senator McCain, are actually calling for American ground troops to be sent into Serbia. Those calling for a ground force in Yugoslavia -- estimated to be at least 200,000 soldiers -- are not considering the implications of such a move if a global war does break out. The NATO ground force would be vulnerable to a tactical nuclear strike and easily cut-off from supply lines. Moreover, the continental U.S. would have no significant force to defend itself from invasion by China or Russia.

Such considerations and precautions are not being considered because it is party time in the West. The Dow Jones rises past 10,000 as NATO bombs. The price of gold drops. People still plan their trips to Disney World instead of worrying about the nation's vulnerability to Russia's nuclear weapons.

There is no way to be certain if Russia will actually attack the United States, and there is one alternative plausible explanation of their actions: They may be getting ready for one big blackmail attempt, hopeful that Clinton will buckle under.

Instead of war, Russia could be preparing for global domination.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

"Such considerations and precautions are not being considered because it is party time in the West. The Dow Jones rises past 10,000 as NATO bombs. The price of gold drops. People still plan their trips to Disney World instead of worrying about the nation's vulnerability to Russia's nuclear weapons. "

Did you totally miss the past 30 + years of history some how Andy? We have lived EVERY day with this threat. By your theory, we should all spend every day in bed, in the fetal postion sucking our thumbs. If you want to live in constant fear Andy go ahead, some of us belueve in living life to it's fullest. If we are meant to die, there isn't a whole hell of a lot either you or I can do about it.

-- rub your eyes (getout@ofbed.com), August 15, 1999.

Andy,

..here's a couple of "shorter quotes" for the file. Nikita Krushev refering to America/Americans: "We spit in their face and they call it dew." "We will bury you."

Yea, I'm from Philly to, and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get the jist of what the pricks want to do with America. We won't do NWO or Trilaterism tonite. it's late, just remember we have enemies and they are gettin' itchy trigger fingers. "Yo, Adrian"!!!!

P.S. U.S.S.R. would not of existed/survived without American capitalists, so, find out what there plans are and you will know what to do with the Ruskies!!! Also, they want the real estate intact for takeover, it's worth more that way!!

-- rob (rgt350@aol.com), August 15, 1999.

"Did you totally miss the past 30 + years of history some how Andy? We have lived EVERY day with this threat. , some of us belueve in living life to it's fullest. If we are meant to die, there isn't a whole hell of a lot either you or I can do about it. By your theory, we should all spend every day in bed, in the fetal postion sucking our thumbs. If you want to live in constant fear Andy go ahead

-- rub your eyes (getout@ofbed.com), August 15, 1999."

I hate it when people post with fake handles like numbnutz above.

RUB - read the title of Maria's thread - it says...

"Subject: Marias lesson on the Eleven Signs of a Russian Surprise Attack"

And goes on to ridicule and blatantly ignore the signs pointed out by Nyquist and others.

All I've done is come back to Maria and Bokonon with some FACTS - which all can be verifieed with a little research.

You insultingly blathered "By your theory, we should all spend every day in bed, in the fetal postion sucking our thumbs. If you want to live in constant fear Andy go ahead..."

You don't know me very well Pal, if this sort of thing makes you uncomfortable, and evidently it does by your aggressive reaction, then skip the fuck past the thread - OK?

We have NOT lived with this for the past 30 years MORON, that's the whole point of Nyquist's thesis - read his essays again you idiot, he's pointing out the sea CHANGE in the Russian bear - read the original 11 signs and come back to us with your pearls of wisdom.

Like Maria these SIGNS have gone TOTALLY over your pea-brains. Peas on a pod the pair of you.

Sheeesh!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 15, 1999.

Andy you are a piece of work. Yes they have been our enemies; no one on this forum knows that better than I do. I just don't see them attacking us now, not even with these 11 signs. Take your head out of your bottom.

Anita, you make my point beautifully; the Gordon twins and Archive took the conversation off track. I was answering them.

BTW, one of the Gordos, I agree about the Kosovo thing, nothing to do with what Clinton says was the objective. But you wouldn't know that because you don't know me.

Nabi, so you just move the warheads? Yes your right, it's not the missile, it's the warheads they want. And yeah they are interchangeable, aren't they? Don't they still need a launcher? Then they will need to build the appropriate launchers. Do you think this is a reasonable thing to do? And why would these ships not be vulnerable? Do you know about attacking ships? They can be spotted so easily. How many ships do they need to build for these land based missiles? can they just stick them on the ships deck or do they need to develop some kind of launching "bay"? Ah, how do you come by your nuclear missile experience?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 15, 1999.

Okay, I'm going to step out here with my asbestos on...

Maria, you've made some good points. And you certainly have credentials that give you a unique if not privileged persepctive. I was waiting to hear some good criticism of the Lunev / Nyquist position, because it sounds all too easily like it could be right- wing, pro military propaganda, so you have my thanks. (Not that being pro-military or right-wing is wrong, but we all know what happens to the truth when it is filtered through the eyes and words of hardcore idealists with agendas of their own...)

I understand that some of you in TB2000 might not like to have your personal opinions criticized, but that is how we all learn and expand our horizons. I hope that we can restrain from personal attacks in the future in a forum that ought to contain lively discussion or respectful debate. Even if Maria is completely wrong in her assessment (who knows, she might be..I hope not), she does not deserve all the insults, IMO.

As for me, the Nyquist news about "Russia preparing for a bolt from the blue attack on the US" is a little disconcerting. Individually, his points may seem easy to refute, but as a whole, IF HALF OF WHAT HE's REPORTED IS TRUE, the signs seem ominious. On the other hand, why is it that he along (among all the other Talking Heads out theree) seems to have a monopoly on this opinion? If JN was correct, you would think that others (at least a few more, even tiny fraction of analysts) would be in his camp, trumpeting the same warnings.

I think it's reasonable to assume that Russia has become more distrustful of Washington in the past few years, and that it's naive to call them "allies" or "partners" as Clinton has done. It's reasonable to assume that they feel threatened by what appears to them to be an aggressive America abroad and unrest at home. Same with China. China and Russia (according to Stratfor--the best and most insightful news on the Web) are getting more cozy to check the growing power of the West. Beyond that...hmmm...looks like Maria and Andy are going to have to try a little harder to convince me either way.

On the fence,

coprolith.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), August 15, 1999.

Maria,

I assume the reason you didn't quote all of point #7 when you attempted to ridicule and rebut it was because it clearly spells out HOW the Russians are moving their land-based nukes to naval vessels. Just so there's no misunderstanding, I'll repost the part you ommitted.

7. Russia is moving its strategic nuclear weapons from land to sea.

This is perhaps one of the most ominous developments to take place in Russia during the past six months.

Any military strategist knows that sea-based nuclear weapons, particularly those on submarines, are considerably less vulnerable to attack than land-based weapons. Strategists in both Russia and the United States also know that land-based missiles can be knocked out by ground-bursting nuclear weapons, making the need for sea- based weaponry critical. Russia has long had numerical superiority over the United States in both nuclear weapons and submarines. Russia has 42 ballistic missile submarines compared to 18 for the United States.

The article said the percent of Russia's strategic nuclear weapons based on naval vessels (primarily submarines) was increasing from 30% to 50%.

Again, I wonder why I bother responding to you, Maria.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), August 15, 1999.

Nabi:

I think it's pretty clear at this point that Maria can type, but she plain can't read.

Anita Evangelista

-- Anita Evangelista (ale@townsqr.com), August 15, 1999.

My conclusion also, Anita:-)...

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), August 15, 1999.

Andy,

With all due respect, it is possible to read too much, if you choose only to read that which is in line with your own viewpoint.

The history of warfare shows that nations tend to attack first those that are perceived as constituting the most immediate threat. Have you considered Dagestan? The Rusians are now sabre-rattling with the Islamic nations. Contrary to assertions that are absurd in in the most-high extreme, the Russians are not free of internal uprisings. If the Russians are coming, they will be limping.

You are obviously well read on the subjects you choose to look at, but your peripheral vision seems to be faulty.

If the Russians went on the march, they would most likely want to take out border countries, first. As far as a nuke strike is concerned, MAD still exists, and the Russians know it. If anything, our capablities are in better shape than theirs.

Anita,

The passions that spawn wars, are emotional. The tactics and strategies that carry them out are coldy reasoned. The Japanese would never have attacked Pearl Harbor, if they hadn't been completely convinced they could take out our fleet and that they possessed the necessary infrastructure to carry out a prolonged war. The same was true of Hitler. He would have never started his campaign against Europe, if it hadn't been for the near fanatical isolationism of the U.S. and a non-agression treaty with a very un-trustworthy Stalin. True, those ended up being gross miscalculations for both, in the final outcome, but they at least looked logical, at the time. Both countries were in good shape, full of piss and vinegar and ready to rock and roll. The Rusians, currently are none of the above.

You can't rule out the possibility that the Russians or the Chinese, for that matter, might freak out during a Y2K glitch, think we're attacking them and then start something unfortunate, but I doubt they're actually ploting anything.

Y2K is a GLOBAL issue, you know? They're going to have problems on top of the ones they're already having, come 1/1/00. I'm sorry, but this is just a case of looking for more s--t to worry about, because you haven't hit your daily drama quota.

BTW, here's a link to a story about the Dagestan problem

http://www .cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9908/14/russia.dagestan.03/. Yes, it's CNN, so "Illuminati" types, should probably not bother.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), August 15, 1999.

Clarification: The "drama quota" line was directed at everybody who thinks the Russians are coming, not just Anita. Wouldn't want anyone to feel left out...

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), August 15, 1999.

Friend Bokonon:

If only it were as simple as seeking a "daily drama quotient" -- we could all just imagine our spouses are having affairs, and see where that leads. Or imagine that Our Mighty Leader actually took bribes from Chinese officials, and think about what that might mean. Or even imagine that anything we say on this forum makes one whit of difference.

Ultimately, all we have is speculation. You are speculating, based on major news media that Russia is a sick or dying bear. Others base their speculations on different sources. There is much to be said, for and against, either source.

Personally, I think that we Great Unwashed are not consulted when the Leaders decide to do what they do -- we are left with shedding the blood and cleaning up the pieces. The best we can do, from our "Little Guy" positions, is try to figure out where the rolling snowball is heading, and they try to get out of the way.

-- Anita Evangelista (ale@townsqr.com), August 15, 1999.

"You don't know me very well Pal, if this sort of thing makes you uncomfortable, and evidently it does by your aggressive reaction, then skip the *explative deleted as I believe moderation was supposed to care of such things* past the thread - OK?"

Nope, still a free country and I still have a 1st Ammendmant right to speak my mind. (Yeah I know I know, NWO's coming, use it while you can) The Russian threat doesn't make me uncomfortable at all. What *annoys* me though is all these supposed "experts", like Nyquist, who want their 15 minutes of fame. Fastest path? Scare people.

Maybe I am the ultimate cynic, who knows. I live every day as if the nukes are coming at any moment, that every plane I board is going down and so on. However, I don't let it stop me from living.

"We have NOT lived with this for the past 30 years MORON, that's the whole point of Nyquist's thesis - read his essays again you idiot, he's pointing out the sea CHANGE in the Russian bear - read the original 11 signs and come back to us with your pearls of wisdom. "

Oh really? So the Cuban Missile Crisis, "Atomic Cafe" and "duck & cover" were all for nothing? Daily bomb drills in the 50's at some schools (most were weekly) were because of an imagined threat? The 100,000 plus bomb shelters that were built in the USA alone? The entire cold war? Reagen's proposed Star Wars defense system was for what? Swatting flys?

If you really think that this threat is new, you are dreaming. How about instead of latching on to every essay by an "expert" how about you use some thought process?

-- rub your eyes (getout@ofbed.com), August 16, 1999.

rub a dub dub,

I merely objected to your notion of me curled up in a foetal position sucking my thumb - as I said you don't know me, if you did I doubt you'd say that to me face to face, you wouldn't be standing long...

You still miss the point - this is getting VERY tiresome - the essay is to do with SIGNS, as in, things that are out of the ordinary, as in, on their own - maybe nothing to worry about - as in, put together - there is a pattern...

Do you get it yet Michelin Man???

Ever heard of Devils' Advocate??? This is a y2k forum, perhaps the Russians perceive the GPS rollover and y2k itself as their "window of opportunity"...

If you had your way, going by the ridicule you are heaping on me, then none of this would come to light would it? Free speech?

Please get off your high horse and add something constuctive to this - don't just come along and accuse Nyquist of grandstanding... put up or shut up.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

Read between the lines RUB on this one...

Stratfor - July 9th

Russian intelligence officials announced on July 8 that U.S. citizen Justine Hamilton had been caught spying on industrial facilities in the Voronezh region in June. Actual details of the incident vary. Russias Ekho Moskvy radio reported that Hamilton, a Russian language specialist, was working as an official representative of the state of Kansas in the region when she collected "information which constituted a state secret." Ekho Moskvy said Hamilton had "displayed an active interest in the regions industrial potential."

The Associated Press carried a slightly different story, citing a Federal Security Service (FSB) spokesman as stating that Hamilton, 25, had been part of a Kansas-based university exchange program since January 1998. Hamilton was reportedly summoned to the regional FSB headquarters on June 21, where she admitted to collecting material from the regions defense factories, as well as passing economic and political information to the CIA. The FSB spokesman said Hamilton departed Russia on June 23, when her visa expired, and will not be allowed back in the country. The U.S. Embassy in Moscow reportedly would neither confirm nor deny the story.

This report comes only a week after Lt. Col. Peter Hoffman, assistant military attache at the U.S. embassy in Moscow, was deemed persona non grata by the Russian foreign ministry and ordered to leave the country. Hoffman had a week earlier received word from the foreign ministry that his presence in Russia was "undesirable." Hoffmans expulsion from Russia was reportedly seen in Washington as retaliation for the May 1 expulsion from the U.S. of a Russian UN official, who had been caught red-handed in April attempting to obtain classified information. The U.S. late last year also refused to allow a Russian agent to reenter the country when he attempted to return to the Russian Embassy following a vacation.

It seems only appropriate that, with Russian "Bear" bombers carrying out missions near Iceland for the first time in a decade, we should also see a return of the spy game. Not, of course, that the spy game ever went away, but it hasnt been as public and political as this in quite some time. According to U.S. officials, Russia has dramatically increased its espionage activity over the last six months, and has clamped down on contacts between current and former Russian military personnel and Western diplomats. Additionally, while Washington has attempted to downplay the recent incidents in an apparent effort to avoid further straining relations, Russia seems to be politicizing them. The initial request that Hoffman leave Russia coincided with Russian military flights near the Norwegian and Icelandic coasts and, in hindsight, with the Hamilton case. His expulsion also reportedly violated the unwritten rules of espionage, which reject retaliation for cases in which spies are caught red-handed  as was the case with Russias UN official. This latest announcement, coming weeks after the reported incident, also appears political in nature.

First with last Decembers Operation Desert Fox in Iraq, and reinforced with Operation Allied Force in Kosovo, Washington has made it plain that it does not consider Russian concerns to be a factor standing in the way of the U.S. and NATOs agenda. Moscow is understandably perturbed, and of the belief that if Washington will not behave as a friend, then it can only be considered a foe. Thus the resurgence of espionage and, more to the point, the public manner in which the issue is being handled.

Fundamentally these arrests change little, except perhaps to invigorate the careers of spy novelists like John LeCarre, who in the post-Cold War world have had to resort to tales of Panamanian intrigue. There always has been and always will be espionage carried out by the U.S. against Russia and by Russia against the U.S. But the symbolism is important. The military exercises, the severance of relations with NATO, the surge in arms sales, the expulsion of alleged spies  all are reminders of what could be if the West chooses to continue behaving as if Russian interests are insignificant. They also raise the cost of reconciliation for both the West and for Russias pro-Western faction. The Russian military and security services newfound belligerence is a lever against both NATO and the Yeltsin government. Russias hardliners are not ready to kiss and make up. They are not ready to return to the status quo ante, if that means letting things quiet down to Russian impotence circa November 1998. The FSB and the Russian military are just passing on a little reminder of how things were, as a warning of how they could be.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

Well Andy, with you keeping score there is no "putting up". My points are valid, if you don't like em, tough luck.

As for me getting off my "high horse", at least I have a horse. You on the other hand seem to be the pooper scooper falling every person who writes an essay around scooping up their horses poop. Why not try thinking for yourself once instead of posting every blasted article you ever read. You know if you spent less time reading every piece of garbage posted on the web, you might just get an indvidual thought once in awhile.

-- rub your eyes (getout@ofbed.com), August 16, 1999.

"My points are valid, if you don't like em, tough luck."

No, I don't like them because they are not valid. you are simply rgurgitating Marias crapola about the cold war in the gold old days.

That's not what Nyquist and Ruddy are saying at all and you know it shit for brains. they are saying that there are subtle and not so subtle signs that Ivan is up to something. Are you so thick that you don't understand this?

Maria has already made an ass of herself by disputing each, one by one.

Last chance numb nuts.

Why don't you give us all your analysis of each sign, one by one, including the 12th that I just posted above.

We're all waiting - put up or shut up.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

"The reason for a strike is simple. Communism and capitalism cannot co-exist over the long term. Capitalism produces more excess wealth and develops technology much faster than communism. Unless a communist nation is completely self contained reguarding natural rescources and financial systems the capitalist countries will siphon off what wealth it produces supplying these rescources and technology.

Y2K is about to level the infrastructure of China and Russia. They will be years repairing their systems, and in the case of China and Russia, both will lose all status as superpowers in the interim. By the time they recover most of the CIC countries will have defaulted to NATO, Taiwan will be armed to the teeth and nuclear capable, India and Pakistan will have become nuclear superpowers, and more than likely Iran will have developed a nuclear program. In the case of Russia, while we have so far contained the threat of their nukes falling into terrorist hands, this is going to prove impossible in the post Y2K chaos. However badly Y2K effects the United States we will clearly be in better shape than the communist bloc, and on recovery will have fielded a whole new generation of weapons which will be invulnerable to the old communist technology. So the choice is simple, either the Russians and Chinese choose to nuke us, and use their conventional superiority to take over the world, or communism dies and they come under the umbrella of NATO and the NWO. That is really all the choice there is in the long run."

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), April 15, 1999.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

This e-mail from Mr. Nyquist...

"Earlier today, I read the article on worldnetdaily about NATO's strategy to start a world war to conquer Russia. While I do believe that NATO is the military of the CFR I don't believe they have a strategy to start a war with Russia. Furthermore, this whole Kosovo event is playing right into the Soviet's hands. Their people now believe that NATO is preparing to attack Russia. NATO does not stand a chance over there. The following is an email response to me by J.R. Nyquist, who has substantial evidence in my opinion that Russia is in the final phase of its plan to attack the U.S. I'll try to post it below.

Why would they do it? Their goal has always been world domination. I would highly recommend Nyquist's book, "The Origins of the Fourth World War". He also has a newsletter for 20 a year. He makes a great case for an attack SOON. His latest article in VORTEX makes the case very well as well.

Bob: I'm afraid I don't agree with the article put out by WorldNetDaily. It partakes too much of Russian propaganda. Yes, the Russian's have been insulted, but the Communist propaganda about a capitalist conspiracy against Russian sovereignty is untrue. In fact, those in America who attack the CFR as the world's arch-villain are echoing Stalinist propaganda from the 1930s, and also Nazi propaganda from the same time period. In fact, substitute the word "Jews" for CFR and you can literally use the same tracts the Nazis used -- word for word. While the capitalists are not boyscouts out for the world's good, their goal is to increase international trade, profits, and the movement of money across borders. This is not evil. It is merely business. The fault with this lies in its propensity to internationalism, and its stupid reliance on arms control and disarmament agreements, as well as the technology transfers with which they hope to "corrupt" the Communist systems in Russia and China, opening the way for freedom and democracy (i.e., shopping malls and freeways). Sadly, it is Wall Street and Big Business that has been duped by the Communists, and not the other way around. Far from being part of a brilliant CFR strategy to destroy Russia, the NATO attack on Yugoslavia is a classic bungle. There is no victory possible for NATO here. If this crisis continues it will break NATO into fragments, leaving the US alone and isolated. In that aloneness the Russians and Chinese will be able to nuke us into rubble with impunity. This has been the plan made in Moscow for decades. It has been testified to by defectors from Anatoliy Golitsyn and Jan Sejna, to Stanislav Lunev. The military preparations of Russia and China in recent months shows their intention, and now they are merely exploiting an opportunity to mobilize their people and their military behind a war they are prepared to win. This future war will not be a minor conflict in the Balkans, but a war to smash America -- to destroy America once and forever. The CFR will be killed in such a war, and the New World Order will be Leninist -- not capitalist. To imagine that the New World Order is a serious threat is itself a mistake -- a misreading of the international game. The U.N. and the CFR don't have any nuclear missiles pointed at Los Angeles or New York (any more than "the Jews" are plotting the destruction of the world). The Bilderbergers are not the one's who've penetrated the CIA with moles like Ames and Nicholson. All the missiles pointed at us are sitting in Russia and China, controled by Communists like Primakov and Sergeyev. All the thefts of military secrets have been accomplished by Russia and China. If the button is pushed, it won't be Nelson Rockefeller doing the honors -- it will be General Yakovlev, secreted in a command bunker 1200 feet beneath some mountain in the Urals. Let's not take our eyes off the real threat -- and a very real enemy. It's time to stop fantasizing and work with facts.

J."

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), April 21, 1999.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

"Hi Blue. Skousens theory doesn't take the long term effects of Y2K on Russia into account. Their economy is already in terrible condition and their government is fragmented between reform and reversion to communism. NATO has temporarily given a target to their frusttrations, but unless the Russians can channel that energy into a concerted war movement directed at an outside opponent the chaos caused by Y2K is going to shred what semblance of government they have left, and they will implode into civil war and anarchy. I don't see this happening to the Chinese, I think they will come through Y2K in pretty good shape politically, and will continue to gain strength for a while into the next century. Their chief problem is the proliferation of nuclear weapons by their neighbors, which is going to constrain them to their own borders in pretty short order. In the event that the Russian do somehow keep it together post Y2K, we will probably have at least the basic ABM system, and laser systems against warheads deployed and operational before 2004. The congress has finally realized that we are not immune to nuclear attack and are reacting to the threat, albeit quite a bit late in the game. Now don't get me wrong, I don't think the overall threat ends with the demise of Russia and the containment of China. There's the Islamic movement that Arlin is talking about, North Korea, and assorted and sundry terrorist groups who will all have to be dealt with in the near future. I think it is ineviteable that at some point in the future Washington D.C. and or New York City will sprout large Mushroom clouds. It's just a question of who gets the honor of doing the deed."

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), April 22, 1999.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 16, 1999.

"Why don't you give us all your analysis of each sign, one by one, including the 12th that I just posted above.

We're all waiting - put up or shut up. "

Because Andy, arguing with you is about as productive as slamming my head in a car door. Unless my view falls right in line with yours I will get "numbnuts", "moron" or some other simiraly sophomoric retort. However, I have a life to lead, you be happy in your little "the sky is falling" world where everything you read is the gospel about how everyone is conspiring to destroy us. If it makes you happy, fine, so be it.

You know, I feel SO safe with you being a Y2K worker. I can really tell the work is being done. Either that or you never go to bed.

-- rub your eyes (getout@ofbed.com), August 17, 1999.

And I think it's past your bedtime too - you can't answer the points can you?

Sleep well.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 17, 1999.

Andy Rabbit, You and the other morMilneons are the most frightened and scared people I have ever run across. If a light bulb burns out on 1/1/00 you're going to vapor lock!

I would much rather be with Flint with his .270 and 30 rounds than with you and your assault rifle and 1000 rounds if tshtf. He wouldn't be dropping rabbit pellets and hiding in his burrow.

-- Chief (bmc@sealres.chitown), August 17, 1999.

And you can fuck off too Chiefy - you're the asswipe that will be an ice cube in Chicago in 4 months time ain'tcha...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 17, 1999.

Andy, Take Nabi's advice. It's a waste of time. And answer my email. BB

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), August 17, 1999.

BB,

Yup Nabi was right - lotta brain-dead simpletons out there...

Got your e-mail on my other PC - haven't had a chance to read it yet but I will and I'll get back to you - thanks in advance for the attachments...

later,

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 17, 1999.

Andy, but Nabi can't read. Neither can Anita. And you can take advice from these folks. Listen Andy, no one can agrue that you're wrong because you pick up lots of articles. Get a grip. Andy, I forgot more about the Russians than you'll ever know. But does that stop you from bashing me and everyone who disagrees with you? No You just shout louder and more obnoxiously. From this I can see that you don't want a discussion of the possibilities. So yeah, go ahead take it off line with BB.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 17, 1999.

Nostrovya!!!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 17, 1999.

Maria, you stiffnecked pharisee. Seeing, you do not see. Therefore, we will wipe the dust off our shoes, and take it offline to the gentiles.

To find out what it's about you must repent.

BB

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), August 17, 1999.