Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Putin: Ally or Terrorist? (Russian FSB/KGB Real Culprits Behind "Chechen Terrorism")
The New American ^ | February 2002 | William Jasper

Posted on 09/21/2004 8:24:29 PM PDT by GIJoel

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 661-666 next last
To: sinkspur

No, that's an assumption in your part.

And no, Koresh did not set those fires, Janet Reno's tank and Janet Reno's gass did.

Putin's war against Chechnya has created an entire army of terrorists that now have to be dealt with, but continued bombing and more atrocities by the Russians will do little more than create even more terrorists.

Putin needs to wage war or Chechen terrorists, and not on Chechen civilians.

Again...Russians have been killing Chechens for over four centuries, but you think that has nothing to do with this conflict?

61 posted on 09/21/2004 10:17:55 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Askel5

Looks like you were right and I was wrong.

62 posted on 09/21/2004 10:17:58 PM PDT by nunya bidness (There's no peaceful way to get rid of the governments that abuse the rights of people - PJ O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

God forbid that we ever have a situation like the Moscow theater or the Beslan school in the United States.

I'll guarantee that we would also have similar loss of life.

And I will never stoop to the despicable level of blaming the heroes. I know who is to blame for both Beslan and the Moscow theater atrocities, and they are all Chechens.

Let's start with Mashkadov. Then we can go on to Shamil Besayev. Are you claiming that these are KGB (sic) operatives? Or that they are in the pay of Putin?

I don't happen to think that Putin is making a smart move with his pulling power to the center. It's not going to work and is anti-democratic. But to go from there to laying blame at his feet for things that properly belong at the feet of Mashkadov and Besayev is just- well, it's despicable.

63 posted on 09/21/2004 10:18:28 PM PDT by John Valentine ("The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Luis, did you check out the links I mentioned above (We Are The Next Target and Terrorists In Muslim Disguise)? I wouldn't bother with these guys, their minds are made up. Don't worry, as world events unfold, they will become painfully aware of their muddled opinions.

64 posted on 09/21/2004 10:20:09 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: GIJoel

I'm here to speak for the sane. And, I have been doing so for quite a few years. I'm not going to be run off the block.

65 posted on 09/21/2004 10:21:16 PM PDT by John Valentine ("The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
"My point, Luis, was that such things are not relevant."

So, what you're saying is that if Heinrich Himmler had been elected Germany's president a dozen years after the fall of the Third Reich, and then proceeded to fill the highest political posts in Germany with his SS cromies, suspended elections, and sought to cement himself into power by extending his term in office, that would be irrelevant to the world?

66 posted on 09/21/2004 10:22:09 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Valentine would point to the marvelous efficiency of Himmler's rail system.

67 posted on 09/21/2004 10:24:56 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: GIJoel

Notice that here too, we need to take away the oil weapon and are not doing so. Such leadership!

68 posted on 09/21/2004 10:27:41 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

People in this forum get pissed off at Bush for not doing things like blowing up a mosque where Al Sadr's (sp) militia are holed up.

He doesn't send the order in because while the short term results would be satisfactory, the long-term effects of blowing up mosques would be disastrous.

When Bush warned us that this would be a war unlike any war we've ever seen, and that it would be a long and difficult one, he wasn't simply engaging in rhetorical claptrap.

Putin needs to fight this war the same exact way that Bush is fighting it, with minimal loss of civilian life. Right now, in Chechnya, Putin has been fighting it in exactly the opposite manner.

69 posted on 09/21/2004 10:27:44 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez


Putin is arming and training the terrorists. Indeed, he was even arming and training Saddam's troops all the way up to, and during, Operation Iraqi Freedom.

70 posted on 09/21/2004 10:31:31 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

My, my. You are given to hyperbole, aren't you?

You seem to be confusing Vladimir Putin and Laventi Beria.

Putin had nothing to do with the gulags, the pogroms, the purges, or the deportations of the 1930's and 1940's.

Putin's culpability is more or less equivalent to George H.W. Bush. Now, you are going to go off into some fugue about how I am spouting some sort of moral equivalcy between communism and free enterprise.

PLEASE. Don't insult my intelligence. I am making no such claim. Communism is inherently stupid and evil. It's no good even in theory, and in practice it's even worse.

But by the time Putin ascended to the top of the KGB, it was a shadow of what it once was. Putin was and is a bureaucrat, not a mass murderer like Beria.

Look, it's just a waste of time discussing things with you. You haven't a good knowledge of history, first of all, and besides, your grip on present reality isn't all that solid either.

I have better things to do that waste my time here further.

71 posted on 09/21/2004 10:32:07 PM PDT by John Valentine ("The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine


72 posted on 09/21/2004 10:33:32 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
"Look, it's just a waste of time discussing things with you. You haven't a good knowledge of history, first of all, and besides, your grip on present reality isn't all that solid either."

Typical response.

73 posted on 09/21/2004 10:34:03 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Luis, check out the threads I mentioned above. BTW, good job!

74 posted on 09/21/2004 10:35:47 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
"Putin had nothing to do with the gulags, the pogroms, the purges, or the deportations of the 1930's and 1940's."

And of course, he is not responsible for the deaths of close to 200,000 Chechens at the hands of the Russian Army since taking power.

A mere lightweight.

75 posted on 09/21/2004 10:37:30 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: GIJoel
Will do.

Look for a thread called "No Peter the Great"

76 posted on 09/21/2004 10:39:12 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: GIJoel

hmmm. Putin is a terrorist, source the New American.

Sounds scary. But sounds familiar. Sounds like the propaganda that was out about Bush being behind 9-11-01.

Bush? Oh yeah. Didn't he make the New American too? Sounds like an agenda to me

Vol. 19, No. 11
June 2, 2003
Table of Contents More on the United Nations

Global AIDS Con Game
by William F. Jasper

President Bush’s new global AIDS initiative will provide a massive infusion of funds to UN affiliates that may be responsible for spreading the AIDS epidemic.

Hundreds of lawmakers, cabinet officials, foreign dignitaries, and news correspondents packed into the East Room of the White House on April 29th. They had come to witness the launch of another global crusade against another momentous crisis. "Time is not on our side," President Bush urgently declared. "So I ask Congress to move forward with [the] speed and seriousness this crisis requires." And the seriousness of the crisis, the president averred, requires an immediate deployment of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars, in an ongoing foreign aid program. What is this crisis? The president explained:

HIV/AIDS is a tragedy for millions of men, women and children, and a threat to stability of entire countries and of regions of our world. Our nations have the ability and, therefore, the duty to confront this grave public health crisis. We are here today to urge both Houses of the United States Congress to pass the emergency plan for AIDS relief, which will dramatically expand our fight against AIDS across this globe.

"Fighting AIDS on a global scale is a massive and complicated undertaking," President Bush proclaimed. "Yet, this cause is rooted in the simplest of moral duties." Thus, the president exhorted Congress to move quickly on his five-year, $15 billion global AIDS initiative.

Once again, George Bush has out-Clintoned Bill Clinton. The Clinton-Gore team (or any other Democrat-controlled White House, for that matter) could not have come close to getting most congressmen behind such an enormous and outrageous pro-abortion, anti-family foreign aid scheme. But with the Bush White House fervently supporting this UN boondoggle and providing cover, congressional Republicans jumped on board the global gravy train, eager to burnish their compassion credentials. On May 1st, 183 Republicans joined 191 Democrats to pass H.R. 1298, the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act, by a vote of 375 to 41. (Forty Republicans and one Democrat — Gene Taylor of Mississippi — stood on principle and voted against this unconstitutional, immoral measure.)

As we write, the Senate version is reportedly heading toward passage, with congressional leaders eager to meet White House demands that the final legislation be ready for the president’s signature by Memorial Day.

Another Leftist Triumph

Yes, the AIDS pandemic is a terrible tragedy. Will this new legislation and the vast rivers of funds it releases provide the relief, cures, and solutions that its champions claim? Unfortunately not. In fact, it is virtually certain that it will fail in these stated objectives — while succeeding fabulously in its real objectives: empowering a vast new UN bureaucracy and advancing the radical population control schemes of the one-world elite. Here is the blunt, unvarnished truth about the Bush AIDS initiative:

• It is the creation of the most extreme-left, pro-abortion forces in Congress (e.g., Senators Teddy Kennedy and Joseph Biden, and Reps. Barbara Lee and Tom Lantos, to name a few), together with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and World Health Organization and World Bank officials.

• It will pour billions of dollars into the personal bank accounts of African dictators, corrupt officials, and regimes allied to terrorist organizations.

• It will pour billions of dollars into the coffers of dramatically expanded UN agencies and NGOs that have accumulated atrocious records for promoting abortion, coercive sterilization, and sex-ed programs encouraging promiscuity and homosexuality.

• It will actually accelerate the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted and infectious diseases by funding "family planning" and "reproductive rights" programs that are already responsible, as recent studies show, for much of the AIDS pandemic in Africa (see sidebar on page 21).

In short, President Bush’s AIDS initiative is a colossal betrayal of the pro-life, pro-family principles he claims to embrace. It is also a betrayal of his most loyal core constituency, far too many of whom continue to believe, against all evidence to the contrary, the president’s empty pro-life rhetoric.

To get some idea of the truly radical scope of the president’s AIDS program, consider the following statement from Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), one of the most extreme pro-abortion, pro-homosexual activists in Congress, on April 2, 2003:

Today’s mark-up is truly historic. This morning we are considering perhaps the most ambitious piece of legislation in this Committee’s long history. The $15 billion authorized in the "United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003" is an enormous sum by any measure. It is five times — I repeat, five times — the amount we considered authorizing for this cause just last year. For those of us who have long called for a real commitment of resources to address the HIV/AIDS crisis, our day has arrived.

The day of the Clintonite radicals has indeed arrived — under a Republican president and a Republican Congress. One month after Rep. Lantos’ jubilant remarks, his militant comrade-at-arms, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), offered a similar, triumphant toast. An official press release, issued by Rep. Lee’s office on May 1st, stated:

"I am pleased that the House has passed this truly historic legislation," said Lee, who has worked many years on both international and domestic HIV/AIDS funding. "This bill gives us the opportunity to care for a significant number of individuals who are suffering from HIV/AIDS and also works toward preventing millions more from being victimized by this deadly disease."

As already mentioned, this "truly historic legislation" will not save millions of lives from the AIDS scourge, the claims of Lee and her cohorts notwithstanding. But it will do much to advance some very subversive agendas. And when it comes to Rep. Lee, one of the most overtly subversive members of Congress, as well as one of the principal architects of H.R. 1298, it is essential to be aware of those agendas.

This is the same Rep. Barbara Lee, recall, who was assistant and understudy to militantly pro-Communist Rep. Ron Dellums. In addition, she has traveled to Grenada to coordinate activities with the Castroite Politburo of that Communist regime; she has been a top official for the past decade of the Communist Party splinter faction known as the Committees of Correspondence; and she co-chairs the radical Progressive Caucus and formerly chaired the extreme-left Congressional Black Caucus.

The same press release issued by Rep. Lee’s office on May 1st stated:

Lee and the bill’s other sponsors defeated a number of amendments that attempted to weaken the bill.... In spite of the victory, Lee expressed disappointment that social conservatives passed an amendment calling for one-third of the bill’s future prevention funding to be specifically designated for abstinence [education] programs, instead of leaving appropriations decisions to be made by experts in the field. "We will fight to remove this provision in the final version of the bill," said Lee. "We negotiated in good faith, only to have the Republicans and the White House push for this amendment. I am very disturbed that they politicized our efforts to address this humanitarian crisis."

Reps. Lee and Lantos are not really all that worried; they know the abstinence amendment was largely cosmetic, intended to give Republicans a phony "victory" they could crow about to placate their pro-life constituents. Even if the abstinence amendment survives in the final bill, there is little likelihood that Congress or the Bush administration (or any future administration) will monitor and enforce its far-flung global programs any more vigorously and efficiently than they do the numerous foreign aid programs that already exist.

When President Bush and his congressional allies began touting their new AIDS hobbyhorse in January, they assured social conservatives that the program would be based on a proven "ABC" approach that stresses behavioral change, with "A" for abstinence, "B" for be faithful, and "C" for using condoms — when appropriate. But it soon became apparent that "Abstinence, Be faithful, and Condoms" would be replaced by "Abortion, Be tolerant, and Condoms galore."

On February 16th, the Los Angeles Times reported: "In a major policy shift, President Bush has decided to allow social service agencies in Africa and the Caribbean to receive U.S. funds under his $15 billion emergency AIDS relief plan even if they promote family planning and provide abortions, White House officials said."

The Times report and other similar signals caused some of the president’s mesmerized pro-life followers to snap out of their dream worlds. The February 2003 Ryan Report of the American Life League (ALL), for instance, reported that Bush’s about-face on the AIDS issue "shocked members of the pro-life community who thought they had a friend in George Bush."

"This is an outrage!" the ALL Ryan Report went on to protest. "Bush’s decision will certainly make Planned Parenthood happy. In fact it came in the midst of Planned Parenthood’s National Condom Week (February 14-21) while Planned Parenthood was asking its supporters to send a condom to Africa in the president’s name via its website. Planned Parenthood’s claim on that website that Bush is anti-condom certainly does not seem to apply to Bush’s AIDS initiative."

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was one of the 41 House members who voted against H.R. 1298 on May 1st. "The supposedly conservative Congress overwhelmingly passed a foreign aid bill that could have come straight from the desk of the most liberal Democrat," Rep. Paul said in a blistering statement issued by his office on May 5th. "The legislation sends $15 billion of your tax dollars to Africa, ostensibly to fight AIDS by distributing condoms, providing sex education, and funding abortion providers."

The Texas physician, who has a solid pro-life voting record, continued:

Sadly, this $15 billion expenditure comes even as Congress is cutting funding for veterans by roughly the same amount. The Treasury is running record deficits, the Pentagon is engaged in enormously expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and veterans’ programs are badly underfunded — yet still Congress is sending billions overseas for yet another dubious and unconstitutional program. This should anger every American who still believes in the true conservative tenets of limited government, fiscal restraint, and private charity instead of social welfare programs.

But most of the pro-life community remain in denial, preferring to believe that the president’s promises of commitment to the unborn mean more than his actions that clearly indicate the opposite intent. The Republican leadership in Congress has aided and abetted the White House in this deception. This includes GOP stars who have built reputations as right-to-life champions.

The lead Judas goat in the AIDS sham has been Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee and the principal sponsor of the Bush AIDS initiative. Chairman Hyde issued a statement for the committee on May 1st, declaring that H.R. 1298 "is an unprecedented bipartisan initiative that will lead the way for increased U.S. engagement and leadership to contain the spread of the pandemic, and ultimately to arrest AIDS as a threat to economic and national security." Echoing the White House, Chairman Hyde’s release stated that "AIDS threatens the political, social and economic stability of the world, a danger that grows with each passing year."

Pratt House Genesis

Again, the Republicans were stealing a page from Team Clinton’s playbook. But the Clinton playbook didn’t really originate in the Clinton White House; it came from the Pratt House, New York headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The genesis and development of what is now the Bush global AIDS program can be traced in dozens of task force reports and round-table discussions sponsored over the past decade by the CFR, as well as articles from the CFR’s journal Foreign Affairs.

Consider, for example, the November/December 2000 Foreign Affairs article entitled "A Foreign Policy for the Global Age," by Clinton National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger. In this piece, Mr. Berger (a CFR member) writes:

Finally, we have made the fight against deadly infectious diseases a national security priority. Some may think this goal stretches the definition of national security, but a problem that kills huge numbers, crosses borders, and threatens to destabilize whole regions is the very definition of a national security threat.... President Clinton made this issue a centerpiece of his last G-8 summit, but this challenge will call for even greater resources and attention in the future.

Team Bush has been more than willing to accommodate the AIDS expansion called for in this "centerpiece" initiated by Team Clinton. Why is this so? Because, party labels aside, the Clinton and Bush administrations, like the administrations preceding them back to the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt, are merely ball carriers for the organized one-worlders, who are most visibly represented at the CFR.

Senator Barry Goldwater described this subversive Pratt House influence in his 1979 book, With No Apologies. "When we change presidents," the senator wrote, "it is understood to mean that the voters are ordering a change in national policy. Since 1945, three different Republicans have occupied the White House for 16 years and four Democrats have held this most powerful post for 17 years." But even though the party labels of the men in the Oval Office during those years flipped back and forth, he noted, the CFR members in our government continued the same destructive policies from one administration to another.

Senator Goldwater observed: "There has been a great turnover in personnel, but no change in policy. Example: During the Nixon years, Henry Kissinger, a council member and Nelson Rockefeller protégé, was in charge of foreign policy. When Jimmy Carter was elected, Kissinger was replaced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, a council member and David Rockefeller protégé."

So it has continued to the present. CFR member Samuel Berger has been replaced in the National Security Adviser slot by Condoleezza Rice (CFR). Likewise, hundreds of other "liberal Democrat" CFR members in the top echelons of the Clinton administration have been replaced by hundreds of "conservative Republican" CFR members in the Bush administration. And that administration is giving full-throttle support to the CFR’s one-world, anti-Christian agenda. Leaders of conservative, pro-life, pro-family, and Christian organizations who refuse to acknowledge this readily apparent fact are actually advancing this same agenda and assisting those destroying our civilization.

77 posted on 09/21/2004 10:40:23 PM PDT by Calpernia (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIJoel

for later when I have more time to after I retire in 15 years. ;) You sure have long articles. ;)

78 posted on 09/21/2004 10:43:42 PM PDT by Chani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia


You obviously didn't read what I wrote above. Speaking of AIDS, you should check out Read the contents of the site carefully, you might learn something.

79 posted on 09/21/2004 10:45:20 PM PDT by GIJoel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
"Sounds scary. But sounds familiar. Sounds like the propaganda that was out about Bush being behind 9-11-01."

So, you too are drawing moral equivalency between the President of the United States, and the ex-head f the Soviet KGB, now president of Russia?

80 posted on 09/21/2004 10:50:50 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez ( Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 661-666 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson