A Suggestion to the Right-Thinking: Check Into a Mental Hospital.
No, perplexed reader, that was not a vodka ad. Ivashov is vice-president of the Russian Academy on Geopolitical Affairs, former secretary of the Council of Defense Ministers of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and, at the time of the 9/11, he was Joint Chief of Staff of the Russian Armed Forces. Drunk or sober, he is the voice of Vladimir Putin. And there is no record that he was drunk. Through his lips, it was the Russian government itself that trumpeted the good old conspiratorial explanation for the war against terrorism.
Originally launched by the organizers of the conference, the theory, in itself, has no rhyme or reason. No democratic government as controlled by the opposition and as investigated by the nosy media as the U.S. government could ever set up so big a farce in complete secret, a formidable challenge even for dictators with absolute control over the media.
But what really matters is not the theory, in which its inventors never believed. It is the fact it is approved, at least as lip service, by such an illustrious high-rank official of a country that nominally remains a U.S. ally in the war against terrorism. Indications that Russia has been double-dealing were never lacking. The weapons seized from Islamic terrorists were almost always Russian, when not Chinese. Putin has allayed suspicions with the smuggling excuse. The General’s speech marks a change of tactics, quite in the old Soviet style, dialectically passing from concealment to ostentation: if there is no terrorism, Russian weapons need no longer be denied; they may be trumpeted as meritorious aid rendered to pure and freedom-fighting heroes. Right there, the adherence to that psychotic theory begins to make sense.
But the change of tone of the propaganda speech is not an isolated whim. Ivashov himself made this clear when he used it as preface to the far more substantial idea he defended next: the strengthening of the UN, based upon a “geostrategic unity of civilization,” designed to stop “the expansion of imperialism.” Absently, and as if feigning disinterest, he suggested that this new structure of world military power should be led by/be centered in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which brings together Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. After all, if the idea is to serve so grand a plan, what does one little lie more or less matter? A UN transformed into an instrument of Russia and China, and devoted to paralyze or destroy American power: this is the only objective which logically summarizes and explains all recent conduct not only of those two powers, but of their allies and their conscious or unconscious servants in international organizations, left-wing parties, terrorist organizations, drug gangs—now almost all under the unified command of the Russian mafia (which is the Russian government itself)—, the network of activist NGOs around the world, the media and even the allegedly elegant “nationalist” circles of peripheral nations. KGB defector Anatoliy Golytsin had already disclosed this plan in the 1980’s. Several scholars, such as Stanislav Lunev, Jeffrey R. Nyquist, Constantine C. Menges, Jack Wheeler, and even I, the most stupid among them, agreed that, whether guessing or not, Golitsyn was not altogether wrong. It was easy for the right-thinking to get rid of us by simply calling us crazy “conspiracy theorists.” But now, what are they going to do with General Ivashov? They should either send him to a mental hospital, or discharge us. In the bargain, I suggest that they sign themselves into one.
Note and sources
* Anatoliy Golitsyn, whom I mentioned above, is a high-rank KGB officer who fled to America in the early 80s and tried to alert the CIA to a dramatic strategic shift of the international communist movement, a shift whose preparation he had directly witnessed at meetings of the CPSU Central Committee with the commanders of the Soviet secret services. I will explain this in more detail in one of my next articles, but in essence, the idea was to sacrifice the unity of the Soviet state in favor of diversification and expansion of the world communist movement, which, in parallel with this, should desist from any doctrinal unity and devote itself to preparing an anti-American global siege, using/taking major international organizations as coordinating centers. At that time, few people believed, but today it is known that 95% of the predictions that Golitsyn made, based on the information available to him, have already taken place, including the fall of the Berlin Wall. V. Anatoliy Golitsyn, New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy of Deception and Disinformation (Dodd, Mead & Company, 1984).
* In 1998, in his book Through the Eyes of the Enemy (Washington, Regnery), Colonel Stanislav Lunev, the highest-ranking defector from the Soviet military secret service, said: “The Cold War is not over. The new cold war is between the Russian Mafia and the United States.” The Russian mafia has two distinguishing features: (1) it has so deeply infiltrated the upper official echelons that it is impossible to distinguish it from the Russian government itself. (2) Since at least 1993, the Russian mafia has managed to unify/unite under its command all the mafias of the world, becoming a sort of Central Committee of organized crime (see Claire Sterling, Thieves’ World: The Threat of the New Global Network of Organized Crime, New York, Simon & Schuster 1994). To this day, the so-called “MSM” (or rather, “B.S.-Er”) has not reported the end of the wars among the mafias, the most important phenomenon of the 1990’s, without which the laying of the anti-American siege would have been impossible for lack of funds. Today, one third of the money that circulates in the Stock Exchanges of the leading financial centers comes from organized crime, which is sufficient to explain the good relations between the financial elite and the FARC (remember the kind visit Richard Grasso, chairman of New York Stock Exchange, paid to the commander of the Colombian narcoguerilla, Raul Reyes, on June 26, 1999).
* In perfect harmony with General Ivashov, The New York Times condemns the hypothesis of military action against Iran and proposes, instead, the adoption of Russia’s plan: to transfer Iran’s uranium enrichment research to Russia’s own territory, where the inspection of Russian officers would be sufficient to give the world “enough guarantee” (!!!) that the material would not be used for military purposes against the United States. No wonder that many in the conservative movement consider the old NYC’s daily as an official organ of the anti-American fifth-column in the United States.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!