Maybe this Nyquist guy is on to something.

[jbalm]

Heavy fighting in South Ossetia
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7546639.stm

Heavy fighting as Georgia attacks rebel region
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jYi ... RoapNY-pTw

Georgian Troops, Separatists Clash Near South Ossetia's Capital
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... fer=europe

Georgian tanks attack Tskhinvali-Interfax
http://www.reuters.com/article/europeCr ... USL8428694

Georgia warplanes strike S.Ossetia-Interfax
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCr ... USL8476982

UN Council to meet Thursday night on South Ossetia
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps ... 0620080808

Reports: Abkhazia Deploys Troops at Border
http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=18950
(NOTE: Abkhazia vowed to fight if South Ossetia attacked)

[ChelC]

You know I really did LOL when I saw that title, I didn't ROFL, but I did LOL. Actually more like COL - chuckle out loud.

This should be an interesting story to watch unfold. Did you read the comments on the first article?

[ChelC]

You got me all curious and I read one of the articles about Russia's plans for the US. I thought this was interesting, because all along I've been suspicious why the govt. has mandated the switch to all digital tv.

They need to destroy communications system in this country and grow panic and chaos in this country before real war would be in place.”

Do you think the digital switch would make this easier to achieve?

[jbalm]

Do you think the digital switch would make this easier to achieve?

I haven't the foggiest. Maybe there's a techie around her who knows.

[shadow]

It's interesting that the timing of this is the same time the Oympics started. Most TV viewers and news reporters will be focusing on China. I'm sure it's just a strange coincidence.

[ChelC]

I'm no techie either, but couldn't encryption be used to block signals, where analog signals couldn't be? Back in my copy machine repair days so many people refused to give up their old dinosaur machines because the computers in the newer machines brought their own problems... they were so much more vulnerable. I don't know a whole lot about television but it seems like messing with a bunch of zeros, ones and software viruses could wreak a lot of havoc that analog signals wouldn't be vulnerable to.

[lundbaek]

Jeff Nyquist has done a great job in exposing the intentions of Russia and the actions Russia has been taking to conquer the West. However, he seems to not believe in the conspiracy of the LDGs within our own country that has been for decades facilitating the achievements of Russia toward that conquest. It seems he explains things in terms of mistakes, blunders and attempts to cover for those blunders. He seems to be obliviouos to the detailed actions of those LDGs in our government that are undermining our national interests--in exchange for global and leftist interests. That is understandable, as Jeff, as far as I know, has not availed himself of access to the higher sources of information that are available to us. He seems not to realize that Russia and China are being used, not by a bunch of drunkards, but by diabolically clever people operating, I am sure, under satanid inspiration.

[Mark]

I just knew you would come around JB. My faith was never wavering. You are just to smart to not catch the whole picture. I feel like a new Dad. How humbled I am to see one of my prodigies finally catch the vision. This is indeed a banner day. 08-08-08 will go down in history as a monumentally special day in history. I may have to shed a teat or two oops wrong subject I meant tear or two.

RUSSIA BOMBS GEORGIA

Also: Is war with Iran "unavoidable"? Israeli leader says yes -- and the U.S. is sending two new carrier battle groups to the region

By Joel C. Rosenberg

(Washington, D.C., August 8, 2008) -- Are Russia and Georgia on the verge of all out war? Tensions have been growing for the last few years, but the situation has deteriorated rapidly in the last twenty-four hours and fighting along the border has broken out. Most serious so far: Russian fighter jets have bombed two towns in neighboring Georgia, killing and injuring innocent civilians, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said Friday.

One critical issue to watch as the crisis develops: Who is really in charge in Moscow, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin or newly installed President Dmitry Medvedev? For the moment, it seems to be Putin who is calling the shots and speaking out most forcefully on the crisis with Georgia. Putin, of course, believes deeply in restoring the glory of Mother Russia. He certainly does not want to lose Russian territory and is determined to expand the Russian empire. As I have written about previously, he knows he cannot expand Russia westward because NATO is expanding eastward. Putin also knows he cannot expand Russia eastward because of China. He has claimed ownership of the North Pole, but the real opportunity for Russia is to expand southward, and that is where Putin has been focusing all of his attention in recent years. He is determined to control the Caucuses region, and South Ossetia -- though not a name or place most Westerners have ever heard of much less cared about -- is a key piece in Putin's southward strategy. Interestingly, a new poll finds that four times more Russians think Putin is the most powerful man in Moscow than Medvedev, and tensions between the two men have been growing all summer.

The Russian bombs allegedly fell on Gori and Kareli, two towns near South Ossetia, a volatile region smaller than the size of Rhode Island with a population of less than 70,000. South Ossetia broke away from the Republic of Georgia in the early 1990s and has been controlled ever since by Moscow-backed separatists. To effectively hold the territory for themselves -- or at least keep the territory of South Ossetia from being reclaimed by Georgia, Russia sent military troops designated as "peacekeepers" into the area several years ago and provides economic support to the rebels. Now Georgian military forces have just launched a major attack on those rebels in a bid to regain control of the territory.

Putin warned Georgia that her attack on South Ossetia would trigger a retaliation. Putin did not say precisely what form that retaliation would take, and as of this writing, Russia is denying that it has bombed Georgian towns.

"The Georgian leadership has launched a dirty adventure," the Russian Defense Ministry said on Friday. "We will not leave our peacekeepers and Russian citizens unprotected."

"Heavy weapons and artillery have been sent there, and tanks have been added," Putin told reporters this morning. "Deaths and injuries have been reported, including among Russian peacekeepers....It's all very sad and alarming. And, of course, there will be a response."

The Republic of Georgia is a democratic country that wants to join NATO, remove Russian troops and military bases from its soil, allow the U.S. to build a missile defense system on its territory, and become a full-fledged ally of the West. For those very reasons, tensions between Georgia and Russia have been growing steadily.

In April of this year, under intense pressure from Moscow, NATO decided not to invite Georgia and Ukraine join its 26-member alliance immediately, but promised to revisit the issue soon. This may prove to have been a serious mistake, inviting Russian provocation. Days later, Putin ordered the establishment of semi-official ties with the rebel "government" in South Ossetia, which Georgia charged was a violation of international law. A few weeks later, Russia began sending more troops to the border of South Ossetia, which NATO said was a provocation of Georgia. In July, Russian fighter jets penetrated Georgian airspace and flew a reconnaissance mission over South Ossetia in a show of force -- a warning, really -- designed to "cool hot heads in Tbilisi [the capital of Georgia]," the Kremlin said. The President of Georgia immediately recalled his ambassador from Moscow, all but cutting off diplomatic ties, to protest the aggressive Russian move.

Back in September 2006, as I wrote about at the time, Russia warned of dire consequences if NATO provided arms and continued building strong ties to Georgia. In October 2006, Russian forces blockaded Georgia from air, rail and ground transportation and Putin sent the Russian navy to maneuver off Georgia's Black Sea coast.

In January 2006, two explosions ripped through pipelines carrying Russian oil to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. The blasts effectively cut off Georgia's main supply of energy amidst a brutally cold winter. The Kremlin called the sabotage acts of terrorism, but Georgian President President Saakashvili, top Georgian officials, and even a number of Western analysts were not convinced. They accused Russian intelligence of triggering the explosions to send Georgia a chilling message: don't join NATO, don't insist that Russia give up its military bases in Georgia, don't keep criticizing Putin as he re-centralizes power and rebuilds the Russian military, don't oppose Russia's application to join the World Trade Organization, stop calling for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to "internationalize" peacekeeping operations in the troubled southern Russian regions Abkhazia and Ossetia, and stop promoting pro-democracy movements throughout the former Soviet Union.

The pipelines were eventually fixed, and oil began flowing again, but tensions were never defused. "Russian-Georgian relations have deteriorated to the point that some Kremlin officials are seriously weighing a military operation, which they hope will hand Georgia a military defeat and topple President Saakashivili," wrote Heritage Foundation Russia expert Dr. Ariel Cohen in March. Cohen quoted one veteran Russian foreign policy as saying, "It's springtime -- a time to start a war with Georgia." Cohen noted that Kremlin political strategist Gleb Pavlovsky actually called for Saakashvili to be assassinated, and that Vladimir Zhirinovsky's Liberal Democratic Party issued a statement in February statement saying the call for assassination should be seen as a warning to the Georgian leader. "Saakashvili is out of control, and needs to be brought to heel," said one Kremlin insider, quoted by Cohen. "If Georgians keep quiet and behave, we may even tolerate their joining NATO, but if they are loud, we'll take measures."

ALSO WORTH NOTING: Observers of Biblical prophecies such as Ezekiel 38 and 39 will note that directly or effectively controlling Georgia would be key when Moscow one day begins moving Russian military forces through Turkey and into Lebanon, Syria and eventually against Israel.

[jbalm]

Thanks Mark...I think.

For the record (and I think I've said this in the past), I've never had any problem with Nyquist's assertions per se. But, like Lundbaek, I suspect the U.S. politicians' involvement to be more sinister than blundering.

Either way, the result is pretty much the same, don't you think?

[Col. Flagg]

Thanks Mark...I think.

For the record (and I think I've said this in the past), I've never had any problem with Nyquist's assertions per se. But, like Lundbaek, I suspect the U.S. politicians' involvement to be more sinister than blundering.

Either way, the result is pretty much the same, don't you think?

My sentiments exactly.

[ChelC]

Agreed. I think Nyquist definitely leaves a lot of possibilities unexplored. Mark, congrats on the (guessing) 6 foot 4, 250 pound new addition! The best part about adopting a geriatric is that the financial investment is small, except you may want to check to see if he has long term care insurance. Kidding Jbalm

[Mark]

You may very well be right in certain aspects JB when it comes to American politicians but on the whole drunkards are an appropriate designation for all the policy decisions that have been made over the past several years. . I would also use useful idiots as a proper description. The communist leaders have very different goals and intentions than do American politicians. They know that America must be brought down. American politicians may be internationalist in their ultimate goals but Russian/Chinese politicians are much more sinister and cutthroat. These communists realize that there is only one king of the hill and they plan on being that king. In order to do so they will eventually need to eliminate any and all threats to their kingdom. This will include western politicians and businessmen shopkeepers. They have said this in many settings and this message has been received loud and clear by any who are paying attention. I am confident that time and circumstance will bear this out. I guess we will all need to just wait and see. Time will tell the story.

[Mark]

I am sticking with Nyquists take on this issue simple because I really believe that he is right. I think that we are edging closer and closer to a showdown of East vs. West. If I was a betting man I would say that the eastern Assyrians are going to kick western Ephraimites butt. Isaiah 28 here we come ready or not..

Russia Invades Georgia
by J. R. Nyquist
Weekly Column Published: 08.08.2008
Print
A s these words are written, Russian mechanized troops are moving against the Republic of Georgia. The Georgian leadership has been taken by surprise. They did not think the Russians would go this far. So the question has to be asked: Why is Russia invading Georgia now? What would a war between Georgia and Russia accomplish?

Some observers have stated that Russia wouldn’t dare invade Georgia. Such an invasion would bog them down in an endless fight against Georgian guerrillas. From the Kremlin standpoint this wouldn’t necessarily be a bad outcome. First, the suppression of ragtag forces is always possible if the invader is persistent and determined. In Chechnya the Kremlin’s determination has been unwavering and brutal for almost nine years. Nobody thinks Russia has lost the war in Chechnya.

During World War II one of Hitler’s generals fretted about Russian partisans. Hitler corrected the general. Fighting partisans was a sign of victory, he explained. It meant that the enemy’s main forces were defeated. It meant that Germany’s losses would be comparatively minor. Only those who cannot keep the field in regular warfare hide in caves and snipe at convoys from the underbrush. In totalitarian terms, the Russian action is entirely rational.

One thing is certain: the Russian invasion of Georgia, if it continues, will mark a turning point. Why are the Russians acting in such a bold manner? Some may speculate that it’s about the price of oil, as the world’s second-longest oil pipeline passes through Georgia. And this point should be considered. But more than anything, the invasion impacts U.S.-Russian relations in a decisive manner. It changes the political atmosphere in Europe and the Far East, in Washington and London and Tokyo. The Kremlin strategists already know that the global economy is headed for trouble. This means growing political weakness within the democratic countries.

Already America has been weakened on many fronts. In strategic terms, this may be the perfect moment for Russia to break with the United States. There may never be a better moment to paint America as an imperialist aggressor. In Washington D.C., however, there is no desire for a break with Russia. American policy-makers have long assumed that Russia is a friendly country. They have assumed that disagreements can be worked out, and peace will prevail. There has been no real preparation for a renewed Cold War. Western politicians pose the following questions: Why should the Russians shoot themselves in the foot? Why should they damage their own economic chances? But these questions misunderstand the real situation.

The Russians see America’s weakness. First and foremost, the Americans are unwilling to bomb Iran. They have upset the Saudis by building a Shiite democracy in Iraq. The Americans have angered the Turks by supporting the Iraqi Kurds. The Americans have weakened NATO by admitting too many FSB/KGB-influenced countries into the NATO fold. The Russian leadership probably feels it is time to tip everything over. It is time to expose America’s weakness. What will President Bush do? By the time you read these words, the White House will probably have issued a statement denouncing the Russian invasion. But will American troops be sent to Georgia?

As for the moral justifications now being mounted by the Kremlin, a few words are necessary. Moscow’s claim of Georgian ethnic cleansing in Ossetia is as cynical as it is hypocritical. One only has to take a look at Chechnya. Russian atrocities in that part of the world are famous. The real issue is the fact that Georgia’s leadership threw off Moscow’s shackles and aligned itself with the United States. Even though there is no formal alliance between the United States and Georgia, the two countries have become close. There are U.S. military advisors in Georgia. The border of NATO is directly to the south. The Russian attack on Georgia may a way of testing NATO. It may, in fact, lead to the unraveling of NATO.

Would the United States send troops to Georgia?

Anticipating events, the Russians have long accused the Americans of attempting to push Russia out of the Caucasus. Russian propagandists have said that Westerners are greedy for oil (i.e., the Baku oil fields). It has even been alleged that America has fueled the war in Chechnya and seeks to destroy Russia itself. This is ridiculous, of course, but Russian nationalism is stirred by such allegations.

Noting the proximity of Azerbaijan to Iran, one ought to speculate on the fact that a war has been brewing between Iran and the U.S. for three years. By invading Georgia the Russians are assuring the Iranians of Moscow’s readiness to confront the U.S. By invading Georgia the Russians are exacerbating the global energy crisis by strengthening all anti-American forces in the Middle East.

The price of oil isn’t merely about oil. It is about food, the U.S. dollar and power-politics. Westerners, however, are always “mystified” when the Russians seem to act contrary to their own economic interest (as if economic interests were the only interests). It is true that Russia has benefitted from high energy prices. More significantly, Russia will benefit even more when the U.S. dollar collapses.

In every strategic equation losses are relative. If you are somewhat hurt and your enemy is crippled, you’ve won a great victory. After all, war is about accepting damage as well as inflicting damage. And war between America and Russia has been the game all along. Only the American side has consistently refused to recognize the fact. In Washington they have deluded themselves about Russia’s long term strategic intentions. And even now they will continue to delude themselves. American pundits will puzzle over Russia’s invasion of Georgia. And perhaps the Russians will pull back, having gained some significant concession from Washington. It is hard to say at this early hour.

If we look at Russian rhetoric and Russian actions over the past nine years we will find a pattern. In recent months the Russians have been acting as if they want to provoke a break with the Americans. They want to put themselves openly and honestly on the other side of the fence. If there is global conflict anywhere in the world the Russian government wants to take the side of America’s enemy. In Venezuela, in Africa, in the Middle East, in the Far East, the Russians want to renew the confrontation between East and West.

And this time they intend to prevail.

[Col. Flagg]

Mark, I concur with your beliefs, Nyquist's analyses and the threat communism poses, but I also think you can't discount the threat from within (our own government) because evidence has proven Washington to be nothing short of a mafia organization that can be bought for any amount of money. Our Founding Fathers and even a few of our prophets have stated that this nation would only be overthrown and overcome by treason within. There is much more going on than Russia or the communists secretly plotting to destroy the west to impress upon us their rule.

[lundbaek]

If Jeff Nyquist is aware of this, you can bet your bottom dollar that the top level drunkards of Washington D.C. know about it too. They could initiate remedial and corrective action, but obviously want to let this continue to the senarios that Nyquist and Mark warn us about. They seem to want the United States to spend its strength and means warring in foreign lands to the point that Russia, and presumably China also, will decide to carve up the United States. Do not think that this is being done to us through inadvertancy or mistake, the whole course is deliberately planned and carried out; its purpose is to destroy the Constitution and our Constitutional government. Satan has control now. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. It is not the President of the United States...it is Satan himself.

[jbalm]

Having just come from a couple of unnecessarily ugly threads, I feel compelled to remind everyone that Mark's disagreement with most of the others' point of view is relatively minor. (Just commenting before any sniping begins.)

Considering all the people who have commented on this thread so far, we are definitely all on the same side.

(Maybe I'm just being a little over cautious.)

[jbalm]

Mark, congrats on the (guessing) 6 foot 4, 250 pound new addition!

That is a freakishly accurate guess. Have we met in person before?

The best part about adopting a geriatric is that the financial investment is small, except you may want to check to see if he has long term care insurance.

Be nice or I'll throw my walker at you.

[ChelC]

I think once you posted about being tall, so I threw out a guess. Actually, no, I'm stalking you so that Mark and I can toss you in the camp with Jeremy. You didn't know he was my secret protege did you?

Throwing a walker isn't easy, the smack of a cane would be more effective.

Mark, here's my guess for you: six foot even and 185 lbs. You used to be really skinny and evened out in YOUR old age. You still have most of your hair. Am I right?

And Lundbaek - 5'11" 180lbs... thinning peppered hair. You wear lots of polo shirts tucked into dockers. Am I right?

I'm always so disappointed when I meet people and find that my mental image was wrong.

[ChelC]

Shadow - I forgot you. I think you have dark blonde hair. You were a toe head as a kid. You are 6'1" and a bit skinny at 160 pounds. You're a t- shirt and jeans guy. You still have all your hair.

Col. Flagg is always in the mountains in a winter jacket just like his avatar.

[jbalm]

I can't believe I'm doing this, but here goes:

ANALYZING THE UKRAINE CRISIS
by J. R. Nyquist


In Ambrose Bierce’s Devil’s Dictionary the following definition of RABBLE is offered: “In a republic, those who exercise supreme authority tempered by fraudulent elections.” He also stated: “The rabble is like the sacred Simurgh, of Arabian fable – omnipotent on condition that it do nothing.”

An observer of post-Soviet politics might propose the following addendum: “In a ‘former’ communist state, those who exercise supreme authority tempered by fraudulent elections and fraudulent revolutions.”

Historically ineffectual, large masses of people have little initiative of their own. Exceptions to the rule exist, of course, like the overthrow of the Tsar by hungry mobs and disheartened troops in March 1917. In that case military defeat, food shortages and government arrogance enraged the populace. But this same populace had been powerless against monarchy for centuries. In fact, following the Bolshevik coup of October 1917, the Russian people remained helpless through seven decades of Communist oppression. Even the 1989 collapse of Communism – in Poland and Czechoslovakia, Romania and Hungary – was largely a mythical wish fulfillment staged by Communist-controlled structures. Those who best understand the thwarting of the August 1991 Moscow coup understand that the subsequent fall of the Soviet Union did not establish popular omnipotence in Russia or Ukraine or Central Asia or the Caucasus, but served to hoodwink naïve Western observers who poured billions into Russia. And so the hoodwinking continues. The “former” Soviet republics, including the “former” satellite countries, are still in the grip of the same bureaucrat/mafia. In accordance with its nature, this mafia has sent its spores west through Germany, Belgium, Holland, France and America. Meanwhile, Russia and Ukraine were never real democracies; so the crisis over fraudulent elections in Ukraine should come as no surprise.

So what, then, is going on in Ukraine? Why has the deception faltered? Who has organized these mass demonstrations against the government? In neighboring Russia we read Pravda’s Nov. 25 headline: “Ukraine crisis: A Western circus with Yushchenko, the clown.”

Officially, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych won the Ukrainian presidential election. On the other side, the pro-Western candidate – Viktor Yushchenko – says he won the election. Some Western observers say that electoral fraud is indicated and Yushchenko should be installed as president. According to Pravda, “It is not the business of Washington or London or Ottawa to decide whether they accept the election results in the Ukraine. It is for the sovereign Ukrainian institutions to solve the process….”

Britain and America stand accused of influencing the situation in Russia’s largest “satellite.” A challenge has gone forth from Moscow. It is the same challenge broadcast before the Baltic States were admitted into NATO. It has the character of a deceptive threat, a double dare that lures an opponent to do what you wanted him to do all along.

Yes, the Ukrainian elections were probably fraudulent. And so were the recent elections in Russia. In fact, fraud is characteristic of the electoral process in nearly every former Soviet Republic. But there is more than fraud involved. Each instance of fraud entails a risk of discovery, and requires a backup plan.

Last year an old Soviet functionary, President Eduard Shevardnadze, was fraudulently reelected in the Georgian Republic. Shevardnadze was subsequently forced out by angry demonstrations organized by Mikhail Saakashvili (a graduate of Kiev State University).” The giveaway is that Saakashvili was subsequently elected to the Georgian presidency by a majority of 97 percent. Western observers didn’t think twice about this outcome, since Saakashvili sold himself as a Euro-friendly, English-speaking boy wonder. In reality, Saakashvili’s democratic credentials are equivocal. He joined Shevardnadze’s party in 1995, entering the former communist boss’s inner circle. Five years later Saakashvili became Shevardnadze’s Minister for Justice. On Sept. 5, 2001, Saakashvili resigned his post to lead a left-of-center opposition party, the United National Movement (UNM). Described by critics as a “power-hungry demagogue,” Saakashvili’s affection for Shevardnadze was unconcealed after the latter’s abdication. That is to say, there was no revolution in Georgia – “velvet” or otherwise. It was merely a transition from an old apparatchik to a younger apparatchik, widening the gateway to Western trade and NATO or EU membership.

Although we cannot be certain, this same process is probably unfolding in Ukraine: with large benefits accruing to Putin from wounded Russian pride, as well as renewed legitimacy for Ukraine’s neo-Stalinist pariah regime – a regime in search of NATO membership, high tech imports, Western investment capital and other goodies.

In this process, it is entirely possible that the good and well-meaning people of the Ukraine are dupes. (Lenin preferred the term “useful idiots.”) One might say, in this post-Soviet era, that we are all useful idiots now – from east to west. The old KGB structures, the house that Felix Dzerzhinsky built, is still at work in all former Soviet countries; and let us not forget, as well, the old Soviet practice of infiltrating and controlling the opposition. “People power,” so-called, is equivocal. Soren Kierkegaard once wrote that “the public” is an unreal abstraction; only the individual is real. There is a similar notion in political science concerning organized minorities. The public organizes nothing. In fact, the public itself is ever the target of professional organizers. So which professionals set the Ukraine crisis in motion? Was it a genuinely independent, liberal and pro-Western minority of professional agitators? Or was the crisis organized by the more experienced KGB structures that have dominated Ukrainian politics for the last eight decades?

On one side we have Viktor Yanukovych, who is openly and unashamedly pro-Russian. On the other side we find Viktor Yushchenko, who appears to be anti-Russia. Here we find a battle with two Viktors. As such it offers us a play on words, all the more ironic as it appeals to the Kremlin’s sense of humor. In evaluating this situation we should not be taken in by the rabid invective of Pravda, which states: “The strong-arm tactics used by the Western stooge, Yushchenko, are typical of the anti-democratic processes set in motion by a rampant and militant Washington, crushed in the grip of a … neo-conservative crypto-fascist clique of elitists … whose thirst to dominate the world’s resources … throws any moral concept into the trash bin.”

The Ukrainian provocation, if it is a provocation, sweetens the sauce that flavors the American goose. And if that goose should be cooked, who would eat of it? What chief powers would benefit from the follow-on feast? The answer should be obvious, since there is only one country – besides America – armed with thousands of nuclear bombs. Regarding this “elephant in the room” the anti-American blockheads, animated by resentment, bolstering the ranks of the far right and left, say nothing. As “useful idiots” of the first rank they do not grasp their role as dumplings in the same goose-sauce, taken in (as they are) by a neo-communist propaganda ambiguously framed behind a veiled anti-Semitism, typifying the Red-Brown convergence of yet another pre-war era. Here is a mode of political expression framed to advance socialism, appease the Islamic world, gratify the underdeveloped countries, rally Russia behind Putin and neutralize Europe.

The Ukraine crisis is not about American imperialism. It is about Moscow’s post-Soviet deception strategy, involving controlled opposition and fake liberalism. To understand the situation in Ukraine we must ask the question: Who is Viktor Yushchenko? Is he a “Western stooge” or CIA agent? Whatever else he might be, he was a high government official appointed by former Soviet functionaries, approved by Ukraine’s neo-communist elite. Once upon a time he was Ukraine’s prime minister, set to become President Leonid Kuchma’s successor. And today he stands, ready for office, ready to lead his country into the EU, into NATO and billions of dollars in subsidies. He has been portrayed as the West’s man, and the West naively believes in him.

The other day I was sent a copy of a “Letter From a Russian Friend,” written by Aleksandr Lazarevitch. I cannot verify the authenticity of the translation, or its source, but the contents are nonetheless worth considering. “My dear Ukrainian and American friends,” it begins. “I am very happy that you have turned to me for my thoughts and advice concerning the developing situation in Ukraine. I feel I should warn Ukrainians and Americans of certain possibilities that probably have not occurred to normal people who are not very familiar with the USSR’s and the Russian Federation’s secret warfare capabilities.”

Moscow’s security services have long specialized in agent recruitment, blackmail, psychological manipulation and deception. It would be strange if these capabilities did not figure into the Ukrainian situation. In 1984, KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn wrote a book titled New Lies for Old. According to Golitsyn, “there can be no reasonable doubt that the dissident movement as a whole is a KGB-controlled false opposition movement analogous to the Trust [in the 1920s] and that many of its leading members are active and willing collaborators with the Central Committee and the KGB.” The creation of a controlled opposition movement within the Soviet Empire served to channel genuine opposition, and as a vehicle for the false liberalization and democratization we see today. The fact that a KGB functionary holds the presidency of Russia is no accident. It is a remarkable achievement, demonstrating the durability of “the organs.” The totalitarian trick of the moment is simple: Put your own agents in charge of your opposition and the process of reform is your process. You may call it democracy – under Yeltsin or Putin, under Shevardnadze or Saakashvili, under Yanukovych or Yushchenko – but it’s the same old bureaucratic mafia as before.



© 2004 Jeffrey R. Nyquist

Looks like this whole thing was possibly scripted years ago.

[ChelC]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_ ... th_ossetia

Heating up.

[shadow]

Shadow - I forgot you.

In my best Eeyore impression -Thanks for noticing me.
You are good! I am 6'1" with my shoes on. You're right with the hair too. I'm a littler heavier at 170 now that I have kids. I used to wear T-shirts and jeans but was accused too many times of not appearing professional enough . Now it's polo's (never tucked in) and Docker type shorts until winter, then it's back to jeans. Never slacks, ever. If I have to carry my nunchucks with me I might wear cargo pants.

Does anyone think the U.S. will step in on this war and assist Georgia?

[jbalm]

Now that shadow is back, should we start the countdown to the first Napoleon Dynamite reference of the thread?

[jbalm]

Does anyone think the U.S. will step in on this war and assist Georgia?

Well, Georgia has the 3rd largest military force in Iraq. It's only 2000 troops (or was until today), but what the heck.

It will be interesting to see if those 2000 dudes scored enough brownie points with the current administration to warrant a 3 front war.

[Robert]

Just imagine when we get invaded. Or does no one want to think about that right now?