Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RUSSIAN THREATS TO UNITED STATES SECURITY IN THE POST-COLD WAR ERA
http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house ^ | JANUARY 24, 2000 | COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

Posted on 03/11/2003 8:42:38 PM PST by Calpernia

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

1 posted on 03/11/2003 8:42:39 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *war_list; Ernest_at_the_Beach
PING!!!!
2 posted on 03/11/2003 8:43:31 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Is Russia still a threat to United States interests?

Is China a threat to United States interests?

Were either, ever really a friend rather than foe?

3 posted on 03/11/2003 8:46:42 PM PST by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Same link:

STATEMENT OF HON. CURT WELDON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

20/20 interviewed Lebed; they interviewed me and both of us with a lead story in September 1997 on the national media where he again said in his own words, that Russia had, in fact, produced these small atomic demolition munitions and could not account for all of them.

What was the response of the Russian Government? They
denied they ever produced them. The minister of foreign affairs for Russia publicly said Lebed is crazy; he doesn't know what he's talking about; he's trying to gain popularity. But even worse than that, Mr. Chairman, was that at a press conference in the Pentagon reflecting what I just talked about with this administration the question was asked of Ken Bacon's staff what do you make of the allegations by Lebed. And this was the response of our government: We have no reason to doubt what the Russian Government is saying.

So then, Mr. Chairman, on October 2, 1997, I brought over Dr. Alexei Yablikov. Dr. Yablikov is one of the most reknown environmentalists in all of Russia. He was initially part of Yeltsin's cabinet; was a member of the security council; and is an expert on environmental issues, ecological issues, and atomic energy issues. He heads a think tank. He's a member of the Academy of Sciences in Moscow today.

I had Alexei Yablikov testify before my committee open
session in Washington. And this is what he said. He said, I
know that General Lebed was correct. These devices were built. He said on the record--and you can check the transcript--he said I know colleagues of mine who worked on these devices. And you need to understand, America, he didn't just build these for the Ministry of Defense, they also built these for the KGB to be used for external operations.

So now I have a retired two star general given the highest award that Russia gives, the Hero of Russia award, supported by Dr. Alexei Yablikov saying publicly that Russia has, in fact, built these devices and that we better work with Russia to find out where they are and if, in fact, they're capable of being sold abroad.

Mr. Chairman, even though our government denied that they should pursue this issue, I traveled to Moscow that December and, as I frequently do, met with the defense ministers of Russia, Defense Minister Sergeyev, also a retired general. For the first half hour of my meeting, I talked about positive proactive things that I was doing to help Russia, to help the people, to help the military with housing, to help the problem of nuclear waste. And then I said, but General, for you to continue to have me help you and be Russia's friend you have to be candid with me. What's the story of the small atomic demolition munitions. This is what the defense minister from Russia said to me: ``Congressman, we did build those devices just as you built them during the cold war. We are aware that you destroyed all of yours. And I submit to you that we will have all of our small atomic demolition munitions destroyed by the year 2000.''

So here we have a Russian general saying that they were
lost or not being able to be accounted for, we have a leading environmental activist from Russia verifying his story, and we have our government publicly going along with the Russian Government's total denial they had ever built them.

And finally the defense ministry of Russia admitted to me publicly, yes we built them and yes, we'll have them all
destroyed by this year.
4 posted on 03/11/2003 9:01:44 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Is this the same Stanislav Lunev who claims to have had access to the most secretive internal discussions of the Russian government...AFTER his defection?
5 posted on 03/11/2003 9:03:17 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Again....same link:

The two of them testified before my committee,
Mr. Chairman. And what did they say? They said in the Mitrokhin
files one of the things Mitrokhin documented was a deliberate
plan by the KGB to preposition military caches of weapons,
hardware, and devices in Europe and in North America. These
devices were intended to be used by agents who would be
prepositioned in our country to blow up dams, bridges, ports,
to cause significant unrest inside of our territory.
When I asked Dr. Andrew whether or not there were specific
sites named in the United States, he said Mitrokhin only had
time to take notes on a sampling of the kinds of cases the KGB
was working on. And he said he wasn't interested in documenting
every single location of every single device that the KGB had
put forward. Because there are literally hundreds of them all
over the world. He did document four sites so that no one could
question the authenticity of what he was saying, it just
happens that one of those sites was in Switzerland and three
were in Belgium.
Last year, Mr. Chairman, the Swiss went to the exact site
that he identified, there are photographs of that site in this
book and right there at the exact spot with a booby-trapped
bomb that could kill a human being and, in fact, caused the
Swiss Government to issue a warning to all of its citizens
about that type of location, they found exactly what Mitrokhin
said would be there. Devices that the Russians had
prepositioned during the Soviet era.
In Belgium, at all three sites the Belgium intelligence
service found the exact same kinds of capability. Now, were
there weapons of mass destruction there? No. Were there
military hardware and transmission and communications
equipment? Yes. Were they booby trapped? The one in
Switzerland, yes.
In the Mitrokhin files, he documents that there are States
in the United States where these devices were prepositioned.
Specifically mentioned in the files are California,
Pennsylvania, New York, Montana, Minnesota, Texas. And he
further states that they are near pipelines. They are near
ports. They are near major public infrastructure locations. All
of this is in the KGB files. Now, this is not the main content
of this book. Because the KGB files were expansive. Only a very
small portion of this book dealt with the location of these
devices. So for those who say come forward and give us one, we
can't. But when I had Dr. Andrew who's, by the way, a Russian
security and intelligence expert at Cambridge, one of the
leading tenured professors at Cambridge University so much so
that when Mitrokhin received his ability to live in England by
the British intelligence service and the British Government,
they went to Cambridge and they went to Dr. Andrew and they
said would you work with Mitrokhin and help to prepare these
files in an organized way. That's why the book came out.
So the British intelligence trusted Christopher Andrew to
work Mitrokhin. When Mitrokhin--or when Christopher Andrew and
Gordievsky testified before my committee, again this is in the
public record, they said that there is no doubt in their mind
that there are locations today, no doubt in their minds, all
over the United States, where Soviet military equipment is
stored today. No doubt. Now, they didn't say that there is a
high degree of probability of a nuclear device, but they left
the door open. They left the door open. In fact, I'll submit
the transcript which refers to that for the record which people
can look at in the words again of a Russian, Mitrokhin--I mean
Gordievsky and Mitrokhin and Dr. Christopher Andrew.

6 posted on 03/11/2003 9:06:48 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Stanislav Lunev is in the witness protection program jointly administered by the FBI and the CIA.

Read the rest of what I'm posting. It is being supported by other sources.
7 posted on 03/11/2003 9:09:05 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Curt Weldon to Director Freeh and a team from the FBI: "I want to ask you the question, one, do you consider the Mitrokhin files to be credible". And they said, absolutely.
They are totally credible.
So anyone that would say this is some outlandish claim
that's not been verified, I would ask them to talk to the FBI
about that and the SIS service in Great Britain.
No. 2, I said, have you attempted to find devices where the
States and sites are listed even though it's vague and they
said, yes, but we don't have much to go on. You know, there are
thousands of miles of pipeline in Texas. There are tons of
ports installations in California. We just don't know where to
look without the specific locations.
So then I got to the third question: Has our government
asked the Russian Government for the specific locations? And
the answer was no, our government has not asked the Russian
Government.
Now, Mr. Chairman, also for the record I would like to
submit a transcript of a press conference held at the Pentagon
on September 15, 1999. In this transcript I'm going to quote
Admiral Quigley--Rear Admiral Quigley is being asked questions
by the media about the Mitrokhin files, about the claims in it.
Admiral Quigley is asked if he's aware of the book and the
allegations. He says, yes, we're aware of it. They said, do you
have any interest in actually going after some of these caches?
He says not that I'm aware of, no. Have you approached the
Russians on this, about whether or not they've done this? His
answer, no, no we have not.

8 posted on 03/11/2003 9:15:32 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Doesn't seem from these files that our highest bipartisan officals share your skepticism...

Mr. Weldon. So in the public domain now we have two Federal
agencies, the Defense Department and the FBI stating that this
administration--and I don't think it should be the
responsibility of the FBI or the Defense Department to ask the
Russians, but both of them saying publicly, this administration
hasn't asked the question.
Mr. Chairman, on January--or on October 22, and you have
this in your files, I drafted a letter which was signed by
myself and Jim Oberstar. Jim Oberstar is not exactly considered
a wacko Member of the Congress. He is one of the most stable
Democrats in the House. He's the ranking Democrat on the public
works committee. Jim Oberstar and I signed this letter to
Madeleine Albright saying have you asked the question of the
Russians; and if you did, what was the response; and if you
haven't asked the question, why haven't you. Today is January,
what, the 22nd. No response from the administration, Mr.
Chairman. Nothing.
Mr. Chairman, also in October of last year, I introduced
legislation. And I just didn't go get Republican sponsors, Mr.
Chairman, my bill which is H. Res. 380 which I have before you
has 16 Republican sponsors and 16 Democrat sponsors. This is a
bipartisan effort. And if any Member of Congress attempts to
say this is partisan, or if the media tries to spin this as
partisan I will refute it every step of the way. Sixteen
Democrats and 16 Republicans cosponsored this bill, demanding
that this administration come clean with the American people.
Mr. Chairman, up until this date we have no new
information. Nothing. We have the State Department silent with
their lips closed. My own hunch is when the FBI was told by the
SIS back in 1992 and 1993 about the Mitrokhin files, Yeltsin
was on the rise. All of us wanted Yeltsin to succeed. But this
administration because of its special focus on Yeltsin and
Clinton didn't want anything to surface that would perhaps call
into question Yeltsin's leadership or what Soviet and Russia's
intents were. So we didn't ask the question. And now 8 years
later, they are between a rock and a hard place. In my opinion,
my best guess is they didn't ask the question then, they
haven't asked the question, and they're embarrassed to come
forward and admit that today.

9 posted on 03/11/2003 9:20:51 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Maedhros
PING!
10 posted on 03/11/2003 9:30:14 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: Calpernia
Bump for later.
12 posted on 03/11/2003 10:10:51 PM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
If the Russians planted "suitcase nukes" in America during the cold war, they're now useless due to the nuclear components decaying. Additionally, leaving nukes lying around where Billy-Bob and his buddy Clem can find them is a pretty stupid idea.

BTW, I note that you never did answer my question regarding Stanislav Lunev: is this the same guy who claims to have access to the inermost discussions of the Russian government--discussions that took place well AFTER his defection?
13 posted on 03/12/2003 5:06:06 AM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I didn't not answer the question on purpose. I thought I answered it in post #7. I now see that I DIDN'T understand your question. I will look further.
14 posted on 03/12/2003 5:27:06 AM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I think this answers the question, http://www.cnn.com/COMMUNITY/transcripts/2001/02/20/lunev/ says he 'isn't' a double agent. So it he isn't a double agent, I'm assuming he doesn't have access to material. But I'm just assuming.
15 posted on 03/12/2003 5:36:30 AM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
I'm not saying he's a double agent.

I'm saying that there is reason to believe that he is pulling some of this stuff out of his alimentary canal and trading on his puported inside knowledge.

Russia does have the capability of doing major damage to the United States--that has never been in dispute. The question is whether they have the intention of doing so at this time. Right now, there is more of a natural alliance--one based on common geopolitical interests--between the US and Russia than there is between the US and France or Germany.
16 posted on 03/12/2003 5:46:11 AM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Um.....not to sound snotty...but Russia's interest has always been to divide the US from Europe...why wouldn't Russia capitalize on this opportunity by siding with France?? and Germany??
And...don't look now...but that's what's happening...John.
17 posted on 03/12/2003 5:51:57 AM PST by JohnOG ( The Fist has closed.....one clinched fist......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Take a look at this: http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/us/letters,%20reports%20and%20statements/hirc-pressreleasr-10-27-00.htm

Russia and France with Iraq....on 'something'.

And the investigation above is not just relying on Lunev. See the Russian Defense Ministers collaborated.

As for the conditions of material that may or may not be here. I have no idea. I don't know a thing about weaponery nor does it offer any information on what conditions these drop places are in maintaining them.
18 posted on 03/12/2003 5:57:52 AM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Mitrokhin himself said that the drops are NOT being maintained. One problem is that the Russians LOST most of the drop sites--when they sent agents around to check on their condition or update the equipment, they literally couldn't find the drop, usually because they couldn't find the reference landmarks.
19 posted on 03/12/2003 6:01:37 AM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JohnOG
"Um.....not to sound snotty...but Russia's interest has always been to divide the US from Europe...why wouldn't Russia capitalize on this opportunity by siding with France?? and Germany??
And...don't look now...but that's what's happening...John."

First, Putin is saying one thing, and Ivanov is saying something else. There is some extreme question as to what side Russia's on.

Second, if they opt to side with the Euro-peons, then they're siding with the same people they're fighting in Chechnya. Russians may be crazy, but they ain't stupid.
20 posted on 03/12/2003 6:03:56 AM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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