Posted on 09/23/2004 10:05:25 AM PDT by GIJoel
Some Clintoon appointee perhaps?
Not sure.
Jamie Gorelick was the one who instituted that insane compartmentalised 'wall' between the intel services, and she's a Leftist beyond left.
And Sandy Berger got caught with his sock documents.
I can't think of anyone semi-high level that would be still giving Kerry info.
Besides, anyone like that would be easy to spot since they like to brag about how clever they are.
Posting my question a second time:
What's the Russian strategic nuclear warhead count today? What was the count in 1989?
The only sane response to this article is "LOL".
Anything based on the assertions of Anatoliey Golitsyn is supect, as he has been thoroughly discredited in the eyes of intelligence professionals today. Golitsyn claimed that every single KGB defector that came after him would be controlled by KGB, sent to spread disinformation. Very convenient.
He also claimed that the China-Soviet split was a lie cooked up to fool the West. Golitsyn was a disaster and probably clinically paranoid. He is indirectly responsible for an incredibly damaging molehunt through CIA in the 1960's and 1970's that never turned up a mole, but did destroy the careers of numerous CIA officers.
I have no special knowledge. All this is available in books you can get at the library.
If "World Report" is what I think it is, this stuff should be removed from FR as it makes us look like kooks.
Mitrokhin's assessment of Golitsyn is on a par with yours.
"Inside World Report" went out of business in 1995, mostly because their reportage was increasingly out of sync with reality.
Oh. I just noticed that this article is ten years old. LOL!!
One wonders why Mr. Schwartz would dig so deep to pull it out again.
Do Russian Nukes Still Threaten The US?
May 18, 2002
by David T. Pyne, Esq.
Full link:
http://www.opinionet.com/article.php?id=950
[Note: This is Part II of a three part series on the Bush-Putin Nuclear Reduction Treaty]
As the recently released 2001 US Nuclear Posture Review has as one of its principle tenets for the Bush Administration’s vast politically motivated reductions of the US strategic nuclear arsenal that Russia and its huge nuclear arsenal are no longer a threat and that the US nuclear arsenal need no longer match or deter Russia’s strategic nuclear forces, it is important to take a closer look at the validity of that assumption. In examining the potential threat of nuclear attack from Russia, one must look first to capabilities and then to intentions. The 1995 US Nuclear Posture Review warned of the possibility of a quick shift in the intentions of the top Russian leadership stating, "A significant shift in the Russian government into the hands of arch-conservatives could restore the strategic nuclear threat to the United States literally overnight."President Vladimir Putin, a former director of the renamed KGB widely considered by Russia experts to be a Russian hard-liner, became Acting President in December 1999 and subsequently President of the Russian Federation an event that may well have "restored"the Russian strategic nuclear threat to the United States.
Even if Putin’s intentions were favorable to the United States as is now widely perceived, the Russian capability to stage a successful nuclear first strike against the United States which would destroy the bulk of our strategic nuclear deterrent and gravely weaken our capability to retaliate remains unchanged. Bush has declared his intention to rely not upon nuclear weapons to deter war and keep the nuclear peace as past US Presidents have done for nearly 60 years. Instead, Bush has stated that henceforth he will rely upon the good graces of the President of the Russian Federation to keep his promise to disarm to a similarly low level of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. Bush’s trust in Russia to keep its promises flies in the face of a study done by the first Bush Administration in 1992 that concluded that Russia has violated every arms control treaty it has ever entered into including the START I Treaty. How soon the Bush Administration has forgotten President Reagan’s time-honored slogan of "peace through strength!"
Many well-meaning Americans believe that the US can afford to rid itself of several thousand "excess"nukes since the Cold War is over and Russia is now our "ally" in the war against terrorism. How well-balanced are the US and Russian nuclear arsenals today? Former Senator Sam Nunn and former Senate Majority Leader, Howard Baker, have written several articles citing estimates that Russia possesses a nuclear arsenal totaling approximately 40,000 warheads. In contrast, the US arsenal consists of no more than 10,000 to 11,000 total warheads, down from 30,000 in 1991. Equally disturbing is that according to sworn testimony by former Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy and Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, James Schlesinger to Congress in fall 1997, Russia continues to produce "thousands"of miniaturized nuclear warheads a year despite the fact that the US closed its nuclear production plants almost a decade ago.
According to the Center for Security Policy and other think-tanks, US intelligence has never been able to ascertain the true size of the Russian strategic nuclear force and has issued estimates, which have consistently underestimated the size of the Russian nuclear force. US intelligence assumes as a matter of course that Russia will not deploy MIRV’d warheads on its strategic missiles in excess of the START nuclear arms control treaties signed by the US and Russia in the early 1990s even though it has the technical capacity to deploy many times as many warheads on its missiles as are permitted by treaty and as are counted by US intelligence which always assumes Russian treaty compliance. In view of these facts, it seems dangerously naive to stop using the threat posed by the large Russian nuclear arsenal to determine the size of the US strategic nuclear deterrent and trust the Russians into believing that they have downloaded these additional warheads from their missiles when they have such a vast abundance of nuclear warheads in reserve.
A recent CIA study released last December, entitled "Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat through 2015"reiterated the conclusion of past CIA reports in citing the Russian and Communist Chinese nuclear arsenals as the two greatest threats to this country. A much downsized US strategic nuclear arsenal would be more vulnerable than ever to a disabling Russian nuclear first strike and would leave us even more likely to Russian nuclear blackmail. Furthermore, the Bush Administration has repeatedly stated that the missile defense system they envision for the United States would be woefully insufficient to deter or defend against a Russian nuclear attack is not intended to defend the US against the Russian or Chinese nuclear threat, but rather against rogue state missile threats which are only now beginning to emerge.
Next up: Part III - Bush’s Planned Signature of the Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty will Herald the Beginning of the End for the US as a Superpower.
Horseshit.
Nosenko was almost certainly a legitimate defector. The CIA committed one of the worst acts in its history when they out him in a special prison at their training center for about four years without trail. It was an awful way to treat a defector, even one you suspected.
This article is rather poorly written and researched. Ames was not a "major figure" at CIA. He was a middle-management guy whom no one respected as a case officer.
I asked you the following questions:
What's the Russian strategic nuclear warhead count today? What was the count in 1989?
Kindly post the answers (the answers are numbers).
As usual, wtc911 uses half-truths to SMEAR Inside Story Communications. It's true, ISWR did go out of business, but for reasons that have nothing to do with any lack of subsribers. The international subscriber base was groing exponentially (a number of University Libraries even began subcsribing to the Journal) when ISWR was forced to shut down. One of these days, perhaps I will write an article about what happened to ISWR and post it to the FR website. It's a fascinating tale unto itself.
/sarcasm
(J.Edgar Hoover is rolling over...again?)
This nutbag was running around FR a couple of years ago saying that he was revealing "classified information." Somebody turned him in.
This is not a source I'd trust to tell me the sky was blue.
Poohbah,
If you have a point, make it. I'm not going to do your leg-work for you.
?....Nosenko was NOT about LHO at all?
(James 'Jesus' Angleton AND J.Edgar Hoover are rolling over?)
Must be why all the Soviet "break-away" republics competed in the olympics under one flag...
Think about it.
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.