Putin subverting US Government! (HOT)

The Kremlin has taken up the promotion of Russian interests in the United States head-on. The key role will be given to the Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation (RUCBC) whose supervisory board will include high-ranking officials from the Russian president’s administration, ministers and prominent public figures. The Russian government asked the Finance Ministry to find sources to finance the NGO. However, it has already been suggested that big business contribute for the council’s activities. The first donation is expected to amount to $50 million. Work has in progress since the beginning of the year when Russian President Vladimir Putin gave an instruction to create a system to lobby Russia’s political and economic interests in the United States, Kommersant learnt. A source of Kommersant in the Russian government said that the government issued an internal instruction to request the Finance Ministry to submit suggestions on forms and ways to finance the Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation (RUCBC).

The president’s administration is determined to use the NGO as a stronghold of Russian lobbyists in the United States, sources of Kommersant maintain. Backed up by new personnel and finances, the RUCBC is sure to become one of the most effective tools in championing Russia’s policy in the U.S. The Kremlin hopes that the Council for Business Cooperation will soon be turned into the basis for a new Russian propaganda machine, aimed at leading nations and built like the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Long-term-wise, the Council for Business Cooperation is expected to lobby Russia’s major strategic interests in the United States. A special attention will be given to the creation and fostering strong informal relations with key figures of the American establishment, business elite and journalists.

The Russian-American Council for Business Cooperation was registered in the Russian United State Register of Legal Entities in January 2001 as “a nonprofit association of legal entities.” According to the data of the Russian Statistics Agency, the NGO was founded by Interprombank and the Inspace Consulting law firm. Other reports name the Tsentrosoyuzprodtorg company from Gorno-Altaysk as a co-founder. The Council for Business Cooperation specializes in escorting Russian businessmen in the United States. The organization is headed by Yuly Vorontsov, special representative of the U.N. Secretary General in the CIS, Soviet Ambassador to India in 1978 – 1983 and Russian Ambassador to the United States in 1994 – 1999.

Recent coolness in relations between Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush prompted the Russian president’s ex-aides to set up a lobbying service for Russia in the U.S. Disputes at Russian-U.S. talks on Iran and the accession to the WTO, the situation in the Middle East and the expansion of Washington’s presence in CIS countries are among other reasons for the Kremlin’s craving for lobbying in the United States.

An idea to create a lobbying agency to champion Russia’s interests in the West has been in the air for a number of years. Mikhail Lesin tried to bring it to life in late 1990s, the time of his tenure as Russian Press Minister. A need to put a spin on Russia’s image in the West was recalled a couple of years ago. The president’s administration came up with an initiative which was later promoted by Vyacheslav Surkov, a Kremlin political strategist. “A few different scenarios were drafted then on how it could be done,” a former employee of the Russian president’s administration said. “One of them suggested reviving an information system for the West, based on RIA Novosti’s facilities and setting up an English-language TV channel and a few think-tanks like Rand Corporation. A system like this exited at the time of the Soviet Novosti Press Agency.”

Some of the plans have been put into practice. The English-language Russia Today TV channel has been on air since last fall, and RIA Novosti’s budget has now come up to the notch of Novosti Press Agency’s heyday, or estimated $100 million. What is more, it seemed a decided matter a few months ago that RIA Novosti would secure a contract to set up a think-tank in the United States. Yet, it never happened. An American PR agency reported to Kommersant that they had been in talks on “PR-escorting a major image project for Russia” with Dmitry Klementyev, RIA Novosti’s New York representative, up to the end of the last year. “No other negotiations followed, though,” the agency told Kommersant.

A source of Kommersant in the Russian president’s administration maintains that a decision to restrict the scope of RIA Novosti’s activities in the United States was made “due to some technical problems and a large-scale image project there will be taken up by the Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation.” Quite possibly, the organization will secure the project thanks to a close cooperation with Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasyev and Partners, a law firm founded by Nikolay Egorov, Vladimir Putin’s fellow-student at the law school of the Leningrad State University. The company has a representative office in the United States, so the Council for Business Cooperation will not have to be registered as an official lobbying organization. According to the information Kommersant managed to obtain, Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasyev and Partners will have an exclusive right to conclude contracts to fulfill the RUCBC’s orders. First two years will focus on attracting U.S. leading lobbying firms.

Nikolay Egorov will apparently become a co-chairman at the Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation after the organization undergoes a major shake-up. Sergey Prikhodko, the Russian president’s aide, is reputed to become the second co-chairman. As the council will be under reorganization, its supervisory board will be extended by a number of high-ranking officials, such as the head of the president’s administration Sergey Sobyanin, his deputy Vladislav Surkov, first Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov. The Kremlin also considers boosting the board by renowned people of science and arts. Evgeny Velikhov, academician, Yury Bashmet, musician, Valery Gergiev, artistic director of the Mariinksy Theater, Alexander Vedernikov, artistic director of the Bolshoi Theater, Nikita Mikhalkov, film director, and Vladimir Solovyev, journalist, are main candidates to sit on the board.

The Council for Business Cooperation is supposed to be bankrolled not only by the state budget’s funds but also by “voluntary” donations of Russian businessmen. Heads of Russia’s leading state-controlled companies and successful oligarchic firms will also serve on the supervisory board. For a start, businessmen were offered to spend some $50 million on the organization’s needs, according to early estimates. Vnesheconombank, Russian Railways and some other companies have already filed applications to join the Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation, Kommersant learnt. Vnesheconombank, the Finance Ministry’s agent, may even finance the organization directly if the ministry issues the instruction. Gazprom, Rosneft, Vneshtorgbank, Transneft, Severstal Group, RUSAL, TNK-BP, Interros, Rosoboronexport, Surgutneftegaz, LUKOIL, Aeroflot and major media holdings, First Channel, VGTRK and Gazprom Media, have also received an offer to take part in the NGO’s activities.

The Russian-U.S. Council for Business Cooperation did deny having plans to step up its efforts in the United States on Thursday. “Still, I would not claim that all the plans will be carried out,” a member of the council told Kommersant. The press service of Egorov, Puginsky, Aganasyev and Partners said they had no information on their role in creating lobbying companies in the United States. The Finance Ministry declined to comment. Vladimir Solovyev, a well-known journalist, said in an interview with Kommersant: “No one has asked me to enter the supervisory board of the RUCBC so far but I think the idea is sensible. Any state needs to further its interests in the world. Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the International Affairs Committee at the Federation Council, considers the plan drafted by the Kremlin to be right. “Our foreign interests must be promoted by professionals. We should recruit clever guys in every country where we are lobbying. A coordinating agency should be set up in Russia as there is no agency to assume these functions now.”

"a new Russian propaganda machine, aimed at leading nations and built like the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Long-term-wise, the Council for Business Cooperation is expected to lobby Russia’s major strategic interests in the United States. A special attention will be given to the creation and fostering strong informal relations with key figures of the American establishment, business elite and journalists."

Well, this is a good move on their part. As I have been posting on this site for over a year, Russia has a deep and powerful influence over the American Left. They started building it in the 20s and 30s and numerous instances of Russian penetration of our society were uncovered through the 40s and 50s.

By the 1960s, the Russians had reached the point where no more instances of Russian penetration of our society were reported publicly. Partly this was a result of refinement out their penetration techniques---but mainly it was just a question of the Russians having so much influence in our media, in academia, etc. that people became increasingly reluctant to talk about what was going on. After all, does any clearheaded person with common sense really believe that the New Left of the 1960s was not under Russian influence? I have been told that the CIA uncovered connections between the Weatherman and Russia, but this is just hearsay, I have seen no published evidence to this effect.

As the groups talking about Russian penetration of American society became small "splinter groups", it became easy for the Russians to penetrate those groups and turn them aside from any useful purpose.

These all are multiple advantages to the current system they are putting into place. No longer would it be possible for a researcher to discover a "smoking gun" to reveal the powerful influence the Russians are having on American society. By setting up a legitimate linkage between the Russian government and people in the American society they wish to influence, the Russians can de-emphasize former methods of control---particularly people traveling outside the United States to be indoctrinated, debriefed, etc.

These methods, while secure in their operation, left a trail. Consider Bill Clinton's travels through Eastern Europe and Russia in the 1970s.

In addition, covert Leftist penetration into American society is moving outside its traditional boundaries. The Republican Party is starting to be be infiltrated by covert leftists, to an extent. I would be very surprised if fundamentalist Christian sects are not also beginning to be penetrated. The leftist influence and big corporations does not have to be speculated about---numerous overt examples exist. All of this will be aided greatly by this new organization.

The question, as before, is a simple one. Will conservative Republicans acknowledge this covert Russian assault on the fabric of American society, or will they continue to attribute the Left to things such as "cultural Marxism", the "decline of society", etc?

America is under attack by a foreign power, just as Europe was before it, and it is the same power. We conservative Republicans have the capability of victory in this struggle---but we cannot win this struggle without identifying our enemy and speaking his name openly to each other. If conservative Republicans can not understand that the Russians are behind what is going on in the Left in America, our society will be destroyed.

To exit from my Ping list, just send me one request to that effect, public or private.

Don't forget Aldrich Ames and that other guy, the one in the navy, as concrete examples of Russian penetration. It is certain that with Jimmy Carter and especially with Clinton, since they admitted as much, that agents of the Clintons were planted throughout our government and switched from poteical appointee jobs to those proteced by Civil Service, meaning impossible to get rid of.

We know they have been content to infiltrate our government and society slowly and covertly. It is obvious in the areas you have mentioned and in academics, journalism, NGOs, and even the churches. Whast is less obvious is the penetration of businesses, as you said, because "eveil big business" is their sworn enemy.

Alothough David Horowitz and others have been excellent in uncovering and pointing out the many areas of influence and the people involved, there is one tactic they are usng that I haven't seen exposed elsewhere. That is the secondary effect of their control of much of academia.

We have been made aware that they promote leftwing ideas from grade school forward and that it intensifies in high school and colleges. We have also seen that those who agree with them are awarded the higher grades and those who don't are punished with lower grades.

Who gets priority for entrance into college? minorities, their carefully groomed vicim groups through affirmative action, and the other students with the highest grades. Who has the highest grades? Those whom they have arranged to have them, those who agree with the leftist agenda.

Who gets the highest grades in college? The same folkds. When hiring recenbt grads what do corporations look for? The highest performers. Who are those. You have it, the left leaners.

As a result, the left is overly represented in all disciplines in our society. Only those who are brought back to earth by reality or those who were faking it all along become conservatives.

"Who gets priority for entrance into college? minorities, their carefully groomed vicim groups through affirmative action, and the other students with the highest grades. Who has the highest grades? Those whom they have arranged to have them, those who agree with the leftist agenda.

Who gets the highest grades in college? The same folkds. When hiring recenbt grads what do corporations look for? The highest performers. Who are those. You have it, the left leaners."

Interesting angle. I'll admit I hadn't thought of that.

Overt conservatives have been turned into a persecuted minority in our schools, is what you're saying. True, some conservative students are hiding it---but that just makes the leftist influence of the authorities and the left wing students even greater. Hence, the greater likelihood of students without clear training in this regard ending up as leftists. (This is just one angle resulting from what you're talking about.)

Let me relate a little story. Perhaps a decade ago, my friend's son was having trouble with his high school math. I started tutoring him. Well you know, I'm middle-aged and going back to stuff like this is not so easy. But I couldn't help but be struck at at how devilishly difficult the word problems were. Sure, some were problems were always heard for me and most students. I still remember from my high school days, the problems about different sized pipes delivering water into a room at different rates and how fast the water level rises, etc., not that I remember how to solve them.

But as I looked at these problems, I started to realize there was something different going on here. The problems we had in high school were difficult because it is hard sometimes to apply the mechanics of math to what is going on and the world---even if the solution utilizes formulas you know how to use.

But these problems were different. They were deliberately constructed to be as confusing as possible, based in large part on the language used. I was astonished to uncover this. In other words, the people who constructed these problems were trying to send these high school students the message that they could not do math---even if they could. At least, this is my interpretation.

Just one small detail about what can happen when people serving Russia takeover America's educational system.

"Yeah, this is known.. During 2nd Chechnya war there were instances that russian military choppers allowed "chechen" troops to leave even protecting them from Russian ground forces."

Quite interesting. In his book, The Perestroika Deception, Anatoly Golitsyn, former high-ranking member of the KGB who defected in 1961, analyzed the news coverage from Chechnya from the perspective that major conflicts being reported appeared to be fake conflicts---that is to say, not really happening at all or happening on a much smaller scale than reported.

p.225:

'"...why, given the vast military and secret police experience at their disposal, did the Russians choose to dispatch to Chechnya in the first place, inexperienced young Soviet army draftees who put up a poor performance in front of Western television cameras? Why were the Russian special forces who, for example, captured general Pal Maleter during the Hungarian upheaval of 1956, too inept to capture any of the Chechen leaders? How did the Chechen fighters come to be so well armed? Why did the army and Ministry of the Interior troops not take immediate action to surround the city of Grozny and cut off the one route which remained available for the movement of Chechen fighters and supplies in an out of the city center?

"Why, with their huge preponderance of firepower, did it take the Russians so long to capture the Presidential Palace, the symbolic center of Chechen resistance? Why, before the palace fell, were Chechen defenders, according to their own accounts, allowed to leave, taking their Russian prisoners with them, so that they were free to continue struggle elsewhere? Why was the bombardment of buildings in the center of Grozny conducted with what Chancellor Kohl described as "senseless madness"? And why, as the Chechen fighters took to the hills, was a local guerrilla leader willing to receive a Western journalists in his own home in a mountain village without disguise, providing his full name and a history of his family? [The New York Times, 20 January, 1995].

"...The important general point is that Western press and TV representatives reported the events as Westerners observing what they took to be a real conflict and a free society. It is not their own fault that they were not briefed concerning the possibilities of provocation long communist lines. Hence they were not looking for evidence of mock confrontations, faked casualties, or planted information. The prominent Western reporters themselves, though courageous, appeared young and lacking in experience as war correspondents.

"Nevertheless, some revealing items surfaced in the coverage. For example, the New York Times reported on 15 January that "some of the least serious" of the Chechen fighters "would parade before the cameras" at the The Minutka traffic circle. That report prompted questions as to how many serious Chechen fighters were actually involved an action against Russian troops. Another report insisted that the "last Western reporters" had left the area of the Presidential Palace, where the "murdererous fighting" was concentrated and the Chechen fighters were no longer able to move easily to the south of the city in order to briefed journalists about what was happening. It seems therefore that there were no Western eyewitnesses to the "final battle" for the Palace, and did much of the evidence of the fighting was derived from Chechen fighters, whose reliability reporters were in no position to assess.

Two Western reporters were killed during these events. Though these deaths were reported as accidental, the fact is that Russians would have no compunction about eliminating Western journalist if they thought they might be liable to expose their provocation. It was no coincidence that 40 Russian rockets were targeted at and hit, the Minutka circle, which up to that moment had been favored for meetings between journalists and fighters. Almost certainly, Russian officers who told journalists that they had arrived in Grozny without maps were briefed to tell this tall story. A Russian General who was shown on television going through photographs taken by reporters, said the pictures they had taken were useful because they helped him to assess what was going on in Grozny. In all likelihood, he was checking to make sure that the photographs taken by reporters conveyed the images the Russians wanted conveyed for international public consumption.

The spectacular and continuous bombardment of buildings in the center of Grozny, many of them probably empty, struck me as deliberately designed to monopolize television cameras, replicating in many ways the "Reichstag Fire" bombardment of the "White House", in Moscow in October 1993."'

Golitsyn goes on to say that he believes the casualty figures were faked.

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.