ARE AL-QAEDA AND RUSSIANS JOINED AT THE HIP?
ARE AL-QAEDA AND RUSSIANS JOINED AT THE HIP?
By Betty Freauf
February 1, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
On January 17, 2002 I wrote “Those Who Say Appease, Appease” are hung by those they tried to please. I explained how the Hegelian Dialectic is being used to bring people to consensus and how subtle it is to the novices. In the article I wrote that Communism was a perpetual philosophy and that it was not dead.
I have been troubled about President Reagan telling Mikhail Gorbachev to “Take down this wall” and it miraculously fell down as quickly as the building in Oklahoma City, the Twin Towers and Building 7 (that had not been hit by airplanes) which have always remained suspicious to me. I guess if there was no yellow police tape around those buildings, then they weren’t considered crime scenes. Ya, right! Check out prisonplanet.com for the rest of the story and watch the two- hour video “Terror Storm” narrated by Alex Jones on infowars.com
What later followed in the Soviet Union was a kinder, gentler coup. Gorby was not harmed. In fact, he was allowed equipment to produce a videotaped denunciation of his captors that he later released upon his return to Moscow.[1] After that he came out with an instant book about the failed August 1991 coup that netted him a reported $500,000 and the Reagans were playing host to the Gorbachevs at their ranch. The “Cold War” was a case of thesis v. antithesis= synthesis as described in my 1/17/2002 article noted above. Let’s face it, folks, the “freeing” of the Soviet Union was planned, not spontaneous.
If anyone would have said that by 1995, the “Master Manipulator” and former leader of the Soviet Union would have his Gorbachev Foundation at a former U.S. military base (the Presidio in San Francisco) and rubbing elbows with the rich and famous corporate executives who attend his “State of the World Forums,” no one would have thought it possible.
He’s also been paid lucrative honorariums to make appearances at college campuses where he receives standing ovations and he delivered a fund-raising speech for the National Republican Senatorial committee for which he was paid $70,000. Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tx), the committee chairman, noted in a letter to Republican donors that Gorbachev “travels the world, fostering communication and diplomacy among all nations.” When Lenin was consolidating the Bolshevik revolution, he wrote how he could implement the Communist bureaucracy without hard-core Marxist believers. He would exploit the natural vanity and ambition on people to forward his agenda without them knowing what they were really doing. He called them “Useful Idiots? We find them both in elected positions and in the voting booth. [Read]
And awarding Gorby a Nobel peace prize for helping end the Cold War, was like one wag said, “ a little bit like bestowing the award on Hirashito for surrendering to the U.S. in WWII” and Rush Limbaugh added, “It was like giving Pharaoh a reward for letting the Israelites out of Egypt.” He has been given a new global pulpit as president of International Green Cross to promote his environmental issues and save Mother earth. Unlike the Marshall Plan, which helped European countries remain free from Communism in the aftermath of WWII, then President George H.W. Bush made sure the Soviets got billions in U.S. aid. In other words, the Communists again got the gold and the U.S. taxpayers got the shaft.
Michael Chertoff, a Russian Jew, was quick to rise to power and became head of Homeland Security. [Read] The Washington Times in January 2005 reported Chertoff was a federal appeals court judge and headed the Justice Department Criminal Division from 2001 to 2003, where he played a central role in the nation’s legal response to the September 11th attacks and helped craft the early “war on terror” strategy. Google Operation Northwoods or go to [Read]
Ex-KGB officer and defector Anatoliy Golitsyn in his book New Lies for Old said the Communist Party Central Committee of the Soviet Union, with implementing help from the KGB, secretly set in motion a long-range plan that is still playing out today. A key feature of this plan would be a whole series of controlled “splits” within the Communist movement and between Communist countries that the Kremlin strategists would use to manipulate Western policies. This was initiated at the 1960 Moscow Congress of 82 Communist parties from around the world. All genuine factions, splits, and power struggles within the Communist block were completely ended at that meeting. From that point forward, any such infighting between Communists, or any popular resistance against Communism, would be artificial and under the full control of the extensive secret-police networks permeating societies under Communist rule.[2] And now you know why the Berlin wall came down so quickly.
Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika (restructuring) and glasnot (openness) were another cruel joke on the Russian people. The KGB never gave up power. The market reforms in Russia were to appear more like America’s free enterprise system. Everyone was supposed to get a piece of the prosperity pie. They learned well from America. A concentration of ownership was put in the hands of a few wealthy, scheming, and well-connected “insiders” and the common folks in Russia are in dire straits today.
Remember the recent murder-by-poison of Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko? In a 2005 interview with the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita, Litvinenko revealed that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the reputed Number 2 chief in al-Qaeda and the man second only to Osama bin Laden on the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” list, was trained by the Russian FSB. Since 9/11, al-Qaeda has become the new global menace, supposedly even more dangerous than the Soviet Union ever was. It certainly wouldn’t do to have it widely know that our “partner” against terror, Putin, and his FSB, are joined at the hip with the perpetrators of 9/11.[2] The plot thickens.
If all of this is true, is it possible that a similar scenario has been set up in the Middle East? Will all those factions soon get together and decide like the Communists there would be no more infighting? Will that mysterious Osama bin Laden that the media can always find but the military can’t, soon be found? Then they could all be united against America.
The neoconservatives in America, who are believers in intervention and “democracy” throughout the world, are behind this Iraq war. The original neocons were leftists to the core. Most were followers of Leon Trotsky, the revolutionary Communist leader who was expelled from Russian following a power struggle with Stalin in the 1920s. They didn’t like Stalin, but they did like the style of Communism advocated by Trotsky. In his 1995 book Neoconservatism, the author Irving Kristol, (father of William who currently presides over The Weekly Standard, and a regular guest on FOX news), proudly stated, “I regard myself as lucky to have been a young Trotskyite and I have not a single bitter memory.” As students of the Communist movement well know, Trotsky broke with Stalin in 1927 merely over which tactics would best succeed in achieving the world domination each sought… The Trotsky link provides a key to understanding neoconservatives.[2]
Many of the early neocons were Democrats. But in 1972, they were repulsed by the Democrat candidacy of George McGovern because of his isolationism and his embrace of the countercultural excesses of the New Left (drugs, free love, radical feminism, homosexuality, etc.) Bill Clinton, with his bushy head of curly hair, was a youthful campaign worker for McGovern. What they saw in the McGovern campaign propelled the early neocons to seek a new home in the Republican Party…and they were giddily accepted, not only by liberal Republicans but also by many anti-Communist GOP conservatives who seemed oblivious to the fact they were welcoming socialists and internationalists into their midst.[2]
They found they had a friend in Ronald Reagan when he courted them during his 1980 campaign and then gave several of them administration posts when he triumphed. Long on pleasing rhetoric but short on comparable performance, Reagan named neocon Jeane Kirkpatrick ambassador to the UN, and Richard Perle and Elliott Abrams were given posts in the Defense Department. Neoconservativism’s most prominent adherents want it to be linked to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal socialism and, because of its rejection of “isolationism,” and to be further identified as a champion of meddling in the affairs of other nations. They praised Reagan for being “the first Republican president to pay tribute to Franklin D. Roosevelt.”[2]
Reagan had promised to abolish the Department of Education when he ran for president but after elected, Charlotte Iserbyt in her book Deliberate Dumbing Down of America told how he not only did not abolish that Department but he signed Education agreements with the Soviets. This information certainly should take the wind out of the sails of many GOP members who thought Reagan walked on water. Some mothers so idolized some of these traitors they named their children after presidents.
These interlocks certainly prove that politics does make strange bedfellows. In 2003, one Republican Congressman, who has never been swept into the neoconservative camp, addressed his colleagues in a speech entitled “Neoconned.” Dr. Ron Paul (R-Tx), who recently announced he would be running for President (no mention in the mainline controlled media), noted that replacing the Clinton Democrats with the George W. Bush Republicans “has not made a difference.” He attributed the lack of change to neoconservatives who had “diligently worked their way into positions of power and influence”. Among the modern-day neocons he named were Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, Bill Bennett, Frank Gaffney, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
And while Congressman Paul did not mention former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, a strong advocate for the Middle East war(s) and frequently being puffed on FOX, I fear he may be throwing his hat in the ring for President. His “Contract with America” helped produce huge Republican victories in 1994 and that is when even more federal aid to education, land controls, foreign aid, NAFTA, GATT (which became WTO), the Mexican bailout, the Export-Import Bank, the use of U.S. military force to “democratize” the world, the United Nations and whatever else would take America away from limited government and nonintervention was passed. Irving Kristol considered the stunning GOP success a neocon triumph. Another neocon, National Review founder, William F. Buckley, was also delighted and saluted Gingrich as a “greatly gifted” leader.[2]
Congressman Paul summed up the problem facing our nation:
“Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our Military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world.”[2]
In his speech, Paul condemned American Enterprise leader Michael Ledeen’s 1999 characterization of the attack on Pearl Harbor as a “lucky” event that led our nation away from neutrality. Ledeen had actually longed for another such event that could be used to entangle our nation in more overseas adventures. Paul also pointed to the Project for the New American Center’s hope expressed in 2000 for “a Pearl Harbor event” that he said, “Would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world.”[2] I wonder how many of these neocons, who desire perpetual war, have put their children on the front battle lines?
Paul never accused neocons of support for or knowledge of the 9/11 events, but he stated very clearly that it has been used “to promote an agenda that strict Constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling.”[2] Paul has a strong belief in the Constitution and has a 100% Constitutional voting record, which makes him, according to Homeland Security guidelines, a terrorist. He is also a great friend of taxpayers’ associations.
Footnotes:
1, New American 9/24/10012, New American 1/22/2007
Also Read:
1, Is Communism Dead?2, Socialism must rest upon force3, 'Smart Growth' Or, dumbed down by consensus politicians
© 2007 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Betty is a former Oregon Republican party activist having served as state party secretary, county chairman, 5th congressional vice chairman and then elected chairman, and a precinct worker for many years but Betty gave up on the two-party system in 2004 and joined the Constitutional Party.
Betty is a researcher specializing in education, a freelance journalist and a regular contributor to www.NewsWithViews.com
By Betty Freauf
February 1, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
On January 17, 2002 I wrote “Those Who Say Appease, Appease” are hung by those they tried to please. I explained how the Hegelian Dialectic is being used to bring people to consensus and how subtle it is to the novices. In the article I wrote that Communism was a perpetual philosophy and that it was not dead.
I have been troubled about President Reagan telling Mikhail Gorbachev to “Take down this wall” and it miraculously fell down as quickly as the building in Oklahoma City, the Twin Towers and Building 7 (that had not been hit by airplanes) which have always remained suspicious to me. I guess if there was no yellow police tape around those buildings, then they weren’t considered crime scenes. Ya, right! Check out prisonplanet.com for the rest of the story and watch the two- hour video “Terror Storm” narrated by Alex Jones on infowars.com
What later followed in the Soviet Union was a kinder, gentler coup. Gorby was not harmed. In fact, he was allowed equipment to produce a videotaped denunciation of his captors that he later released upon his return to Moscow.[1] After that he came out with an instant book about the failed August 1991 coup that netted him a reported $500,000 and the Reagans were playing host to the Gorbachevs at their ranch. The “Cold War” was a case of thesis v. antithesis= synthesis as described in my 1/17/2002 article noted above. Let’s face it, folks, the “freeing” of the Soviet Union was planned, not spontaneous.
If anyone would have said that by 1995, the “Master Manipulator” and former leader of the Soviet Union would have his Gorbachev Foundation at a former U.S. military base (the Presidio in San Francisco) and rubbing elbows with the rich and famous corporate executives who attend his “State of the World Forums,” no one would have thought it possible.
He’s also been paid lucrative honorariums to make appearances at college campuses where he receives standing ovations and he delivered a fund-raising speech for the National Republican Senatorial committee for which he was paid $70,000. Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tx), the committee chairman, noted in a letter to Republican donors that Gorbachev “travels the world, fostering communication and diplomacy among all nations.” When Lenin was consolidating the Bolshevik revolution, he wrote how he could implement the Communist bureaucracy without hard-core Marxist believers. He would exploit the natural vanity and ambition on people to forward his agenda without them knowing what they were really doing. He called them “Useful Idiots? We find them both in elected positions and in the voting booth. [Read]
And awarding Gorby a Nobel peace prize for helping end the Cold War, was like one wag said, “ a little bit like bestowing the award on Hirashito for surrendering to the U.S. in WWII” and Rush Limbaugh added, “It was like giving Pharaoh a reward for letting the Israelites out of Egypt.” He has been given a new global pulpit as president of International Green Cross to promote his environmental issues and save Mother earth. Unlike the Marshall Plan, which helped European countries remain free from Communism in the aftermath of WWII, then President George H.W. Bush made sure the Soviets got billions in U.S. aid. In other words, the Communists again got the gold and the U.S. taxpayers got the shaft.
Michael Chertoff, a Russian Jew, was quick to rise to power and became head of Homeland Security. [Read] The Washington Times in January 2005 reported Chertoff was a federal appeals court judge and headed the Justice Department Criminal Division from 2001 to 2003, where he played a central role in the nation’s legal response to the September 11th attacks and helped craft the early “war on terror” strategy. Google Operation Northwoods or go to [Read]
Ex-KGB officer and defector Anatoliy Golitsyn in his book New Lies for Old said the Communist Party Central Committee of the Soviet Union, with implementing help from the KGB, secretly set in motion a long-range plan that is still playing out today. A key feature of this plan would be a whole series of controlled “splits” within the Communist movement and between Communist countries that the Kremlin strategists would use to manipulate Western policies. This was initiated at the 1960 Moscow Congress of 82 Communist parties from around the world. All genuine factions, splits, and power struggles within the Communist block were completely ended at that meeting. From that point forward, any such infighting between Communists, or any popular resistance against Communism, would be artificial and under the full control of the extensive secret-police networks permeating societies under Communist rule.[2] And now you know why the Berlin wall came down so quickly.
Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika (restructuring) and glasnot (openness) were another cruel joke on the Russian people. The KGB never gave up power. The market reforms in Russia were to appear more like America’s free enterprise system. Everyone was supposed to get a piece of the prosperity pie. They learned well from America. A concentration of ownership was put in the hands of a few wealthy, scheming, and well-connected “insiders” and the common folks in Russia are in dire straits today.
Remember the recent murder-by-poison of Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko? In a 2005 interview with the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita, Litvinenko revealed that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the reputed Number 2 chief in al-Qaeda and the man second only to Osama bin Laden on the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” list, was trained by the Russian FSB. Since 9/11, al-Qaeda has become the new global menace, supposedly even more dangerous than the Soviet Union ever was. It certainly wouldn’t do to have it widely know that our “partner” against terror, Putin, and his FSB, are joined at the hip with the perpetrators of 9/11.[2] The plot thickens.
If all of this is true, is it possible that a similar scenario has been set up in the Middle East? Will all those factions soon get together and decide like the Communists there would be no more infighting? Will that mysterious Osama bin Laden that the media can always find but the military can’t, soon be found? Then they could all be united against America.
The neoconservatives in America, who are believers in intervention and “democracy” throughout the world, are behind this Iraq war. The original neocons were leftists to the core. Most were followers of Leon Trotsky, the revolutionary Communist leader who was expelled from Russian following a power struggle with Stalin in the 1920s. They didn’t like Stalin, but they did like the style of Communism advocated by Trotsky. In his 1995 book Neoconservatism, the author Irving Kristol, (father of William who currently presides over The Weekly Standard, and a regular guest on FOX news), proudly stated, “I regard myself as lucky to have been a young Trotskyite and I have not a single bitter memory.” As students of the Communist movement well know, Trotsky broke with Stalin in 1927 merely over which tactics would best succeed in achieving the world domination each sought… The Trotsky link provides a key to understanding neoconservatives.[2]
Many of the early neocons were Democrats. But in 1972, they were repulsed by the Democrat candidacy of George McGovern because of his isolationism and his embrace of the countercultural excesses of the New Left (drugs, free love, radical feminism, homosexuality, etc.) Bill Clinton, with his bushy head of curly hair, was a youthful campaign worker for McGovern. What they saw in the McGovern campaign propelled the early neocons to seek a new home in the Republican Party…and they were giddily accepted, not only by liberal Republicans but also by many anti-Communist GOP conservatives who seemed oblivious to the fact they were welcoming socialists and internationalists into their midst.[2]
They found they had a friend in Ronald Reagan when he courted them during his 1980 campaign and then gave several of them administration posts when he triumphed. Long on pleasing rhetoric but short on comparable performance, Reagan named neocon Jeane Kirkpatrick ambassador to the UN, and Richard Perle and Elliott Abrams were given posts in the Defense Department. Neoconservativism’s most prominent adherents want it to be linked to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal socialism and, because of its rejection of “isolationism,” and to be further identified as a champion of meddling in the affairs of other nations. They praised Reagan for being “the first Republican president to pay tribute to Franklin D. Roosevelt.”[2]
Reagan had promised to abolish the Department of Education when he ran for president but after elected, Charlotte Iserbyt in her book Deliberate Dumbing Down of America told how he not only did not abolish that Department but he signed Education agreements with the Soviets. This information certainly should take the wind out of the sails of many GOP members who thought Reagan walked on water. Some mothers so idolized some of these traitors they named their children after presidents.
These interlocks certainly prove that politics does make strange bedfellows. In 2003, one Republican Congressman, who has never been swept into the neoconservative camp, addressed his colleagues in a speech entitled “Neoconned.” Dr. Ron Paul (R-Tx), who recently announced he would be running for President (no mention in the mainline controlled media), noted that replacing the Clinton Democrats with the George W. Bush Republicans “has not made a difference.” He attributed the lack of change to neoconservatives who had “diligently worked their way into positions of power and influence”. Among the modern-day neocons he named were Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, Bill Bennett, Frank Gaffney, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
And while Congressman Paul did not mention former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, a strong advocate for the Middle East war(s) and frequently being puffed on FOX, I fear he may be throwing his hat in the ring for President. His “Contract with America” helped produce huge Republican victories in 1994 and that is when even more federal aid to education, land controls, foreign aid, NAFTA, GATT (which became WTO), the Mexican bailout, the Export-Import Bank, the use of U.S. military force to “democratize” the world, the United Nations and whatever else would take America away from limited government and nonintervention was passed. Irving Kristol considered the stunning GOP success a neocon triumph. Another neocon, National Review founder, William F. Buckley, was also delighted and saluted Gingrich as a “greatly gifted” leader.[2]
Congressman Paul summed up the problem facing our nation:
“Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our Military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world.”[2]
In his speech, Paul condemned American Enterprise leader Michael Ledeen’s 1999 characterization of the attack on Pearl Harbor as a “lucky” event that led our nation away from neutrality. Ledeen had actually longed for another such event that could be used to entangle our nation in more overseas adventures. Paul also pointed to the Project for the New American Center’s hope expressed in 2000 for “a Pearl Harbor event” that he said, “Would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world.”[2] I wonder how many of these neocons, who desire perpetual war, have put their children on the front battle lines?
Paul never accused neocons of support for or knowledge of the 9/11 events, but he stated very clearly that it has been used “to promote an agenda that strict Constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling.”[2] Paul has a strong belief in the Constitution and has a 100% Constitutional voting record, which makes him, according to Homeland Security guidelines, a terrorist. He is also a great friend of taxpayers’ associations.
Footnotes:
1, New American 9/24/10012, New American 1/22/2007
Also Read:
1, Is Communism Dead?2, Socialism must rest upon force3, 'Smart Growth' Or, dumbed down by consensus politicians
© 2007 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Betty is a former Oregon Republican party activist having served as state party secretary, county chairman, 5th congressional vice chairman and then elected chairman, and a precinct worker for many years but Betty gave up on the two-party system in 2004 and joined the Constitutional Party.
Betty is a researcher specializing in education, a freelance journalist and a regular contributor to www.NewsWithViews.com
posted by shummer60 at Tuesday, February 06, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home