Posted on 07/29/2009 10:13:21 AM PDT by spycatcher
Meet Marina Kalashnikova: a Moscow-based historian, researcher and journalist. Last August she criticized foreign “experts” for suggesting that a conflict with Moscow will not happen because Russia’s elite is too closely associated with the West. According to Kalashnikova, “The West does not care to wake from the dream of its wishful thinking, even when Moscow turns to … reanimating Stalin’s cult of personality together with the ideology of the Cheka [i.e., the secret police].”
I’m afraid that Marina Kalashnikova is right. The West has been dreaming, and the West will suffer the consequences. If the Kremlin likes Stalin, then there will be trouble. If KGB officers have established a sophisticated form of dictatorship in Russia, they have done so for a reason. We should remind our politicians, with their short memories, that Stalin and his secret police did not run a Sunday school. Furthermore, the recent trail of blood and radiation leading back to the Kremlin is like a finger pointing to the greatest danger of our time – nixed from the news media’s prattle of the hour. (A retired KGB officer recently told me that “nobody is easier to buy than a Western journalist.”)
Russia has built an alliance of dictators, what Kalashnikova calls an “alliance of the most unbridled forces and regimes.” Extremists of all kinds serve the purpose of breaking the peace, damaging Western economies, and setting the stage for a global revolution in which the balance of power shifts from the United States and the West to the Kremlin and its Chinese allies. “Among the ideas that animate general staff analysts in the Kremlin, there is the idea of diffusion,” says Kalashnikova, “It is not that the Kremlin should strive for territorial expansion and the dissemination of its [political] model. The critical thing is power and the fulcrum of an overall strategic context. In that case, even if the Americans appear influential in the post-Soviet countries, Moscow remains in charge. The [Russian] General Staff therefore has successfully expanded Moscow’s position beyond and above the old Soviet position in Africa and Latin America.” What prevails, she says, is Moscow’s “assertiveness and determination without fear of a reaction from the West.”
In other words, the West has already been outmaneuvered. The KGB and the Russian General Staff have taken our measure, and they are laughing at us. Our leaders do not realize the sophistication of their enemy. They cannot see or understand what is happening. They blink, they turn away, continuing to use concepts gifted to them long ago by Soviet agents of influence. As a nation we are confused and disoriented, believing that the world is beholden to the West’s money power – and therefore, peace can be purchased.
“The Kremlin has activated a network of extremists in the Third World,” wrote Kalashnikova. “[At the same time] Russia has managed to shake off nearly all international conventions restricting the expansion of its military power.” In this situation, the only counter to Russian power is American power. Yet the American president is preparing to surrender that power in a series of arms control agreements that will leave the United States vulnerable to a first strike. Placing this in context, nuclear weapons are ultimate weapons, so that the West’s superiority in conventional weapons is therefore meaningless. Whoever gains strategic nuclear supremacy will rule the world; and the Russian strategic rocket forces are in place, ready to launch, while America’s nuclear forces are rotting from neglect.
The Russian historian sees that the West relies on the greed of Russia’s elite to keep the Kremlin in line. But this is a foolish conceit. Mao Zedong said that political power “flows from the barrel of a gun.” Therefore, the Kremlin’s logic is ironclad: Let the West keep its worthless currency. Moscow will have weapons, and in the end Moscow and its allies will control everything. The liberal may believe that protests and appeals to humanity are the ultimate trump cards. The financiers may believe that money makes the world go ‘round. Let them try to stop a salvo of ICBMs with liberal sentiment and cash. As far as the laws of physics are concerned, their favored instruments cannot stop a single missile.
According to Kalashnikova, “It is clear that the [Kremlin] regime has no restraint and will commit any crime, break any rule, surpass any benchmark in order to consolidate its already illegitimate power….” Even the old KGB chief, Vladimir Kryuchkov, was appalled: “Putin and others have to answer for what they are doing today to the country,” he said. But the West sleeps. The West doesn’t want to hear about the danger that rises in the East – from the Kremlin and its Chinese allies. As Kalashnikova points out, the warnings of Russian observers like Viktor Suvorov and Vladimir Bukovsky have been almost totally ignored. Western chauvinism is deep-rooted, and the Westerner takes his military and economic superiority for granted. He laughs at the idea that “the Russians are coming.” But the joke is on America. The Kremlin’s psychological advantage is vital and immediate, and extends into the political domain. This is significant because the outcome of every war is pre-determined by the political process leading up to the war.
Kalashnikova laments that Suvorov and Bukovsky remain largely unknown, “and are even hated by the Western establishment … [which] avoids uncomfortable truths about the world and themselves, especially when the truth comes from Russian critics.” Do the Americans have sense? Are they serious people? No, said Suvorov more than two decades ago. No, says Kalashnikova today. The Russian generals are getting ready. They are consolidating their influence because the coming war requires it.
“The NATO idea of deterrence means absolutely nothing to the Russian generals,” wrote Kalashnikova. “Unlike their Western counterparts, they are not afraid of big military and civilian losses. This was true in the time of Stalin. Losses do not affect the popularity of Kremlin rulers….” The philosopher Nietzsche once wrote that sacrificing people for a state or an idea makes that state or idea all the more precious to those who have made the sacrifice. Such is human psychology, yesterday, today and tomorrow.
“The strategic balance,” warned Kalashnikova, “has by and large never worked.” Standing outside the logic of nuclear deterrence, Kremlin leaders have modernized their nuclear bunkers. They are prepared to survive. “The current Russian military is not weaker than the USSR,” she says, “and in some areas it surpasses the Soviet military.” – This from a writer who has personally interviewed Russian generals, spy chiefs and statesmen. She goes on to say that after 9/11 Russia’s terrorist allies can be realistically assumed to play a key role in the strategic equation. And then she fatefully quotes a NATO functionary who spoke about the role of al Qaeda and Bin Laden as follows: “This [9/11 attack] is beyond their intellectual capabilities.” Insights of this kind have been known to trigger “polonium reactions,” as in the case of former FSB Lt. Col. Alexander Litvinenko – who publicly declared that Vladimir Putin was the master terrorist behind al Qaeda.
And here is where the plot thickens. When Marina Kalashnikova presented her analysis to Russian and Ukrainian readers on August 26, 2008, she annoyed the regime and made herself a target of the Russian secret police. Her Moscow residence was broken into. Private papers were stolen. Threats were made. And last, but not least, she was forcibly incarcerated in a psychiatric clinic for 35 days. “I am completely healthy,” Kalashnikova told me during a telephone interview on Sunday. “It was absolutely political … and not medical at all.”
And what excuse did they offer for breaking the door locks and grabbing her? “I was allegedly aggressive,” she explained, “even though I was staying behind the door of my own home.” What she had done, of course, was reveal the hostile intentions of the Russian government toward the United States. “Just yesterday,” she explained, “I got some threats that they would get me back to the clinic because I did not fulfill the agreement of not interfering in political subjects here. I am forbidden to do journalism and politics and interviewing and everything. So I can only arrange everyday life. My endeavors, and my active communication with the West regarding this psychiatric imprisonment [is forbidden]. I feel completely insecure here. It is no joke. It is no exaggeration. The reality is even more awful and criminal. I try not to frighten people. The American people are too comfortable. I have underestimated and under-described the situation. It is very dangerous. The situation needs their urgent sorting out.”
And what situation is she talking about?
“I think that Russia has always had America as the enemy,” Kalashnikova told me, “and it remains in such a capacity. I think that all preparations that Russia makes are military preparations, and preparations for war. I talked three times during recent days with … a former politician and party functionary and bright diplomat … and he confirmed that they expect war.”
I hope that Marina Kalashnikova is safe, and that Americans will appreciate her courage, heed her warnings, and prevent the outbreak of war through care and vigilance. Marina gave me permission to tell her story and relate her words to those who are sleeping in the West. She needs our help, and she deserves it.
I wonder if she is any relation to Mikhail Kalashnikov, the developer of the AK-47 rifle series? I know many Russian females put an “a” at the end of the surname.
Oh and yeah, the Chinese dial 911 and the Russians—err Soviets (and their allies) come to the rescue...
Not so odd if you have been watching putty-pute. He is building an alliance of our enemies and he is sticking his fingers in our eyes every chance he gets.
I don't have to. It is a matter of historical record. Even Orwell wrote about it in Homage to Catalonia.
I'll tell you what, I'll even be nice and give you a dandy example of what I'm talking about. I won't even stoop to how European banking families funded Lenin; I'll work off an example here in the USA.
A Marxist railroad attorney and former ambassador to Germany acting as the Clerk of the US Supreme Court added a headnote to an opinion (Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific) that became the precedent giving corporations equal protection to people as "persons" under the 14th Amendment: Kelo and the 14th Amendment: Exploring a Constitutional Koan. The decision was key to developing the corporate robber barony that became the tax-exempt foundations running environmental NGOs today.
Iwould simply assume and count upon that all of the zer0bots are “giving away the farm” on state secrets as rapidly as they possibly can...trying to do as much damage as they effectively can while profiting at the same time.
Some days I think it might just be better if we simply all stormed DC en masse with pitchforks and torches - and a few other useful (but nameless in this forum) implements, and literally threw the rascals out, pausing only to confiscate their incriminating documents for the sake of future prosecution.
But that’s nothing but a totally far-fetched, recurring daydream that passes before my eyes...you know - the sort of thing no sensible American would ever instigate or act upon, right?
A.A.C.
Less than 20% of colonial Americans actively supported our Revolution. Don’t need everybody or even half the population. The same people who’re putting their heads in the sand now, will put their heads in the sand no matter what’s happening around them.
I agree, and am with you. However, there was actual leadership, some organization, a declaration of independence, and a commitment to the idea of “united we stand, divivded we fall”.
The leadership is coallescing as we speak. Probably will revolve around Palin. The Tea Parties have given the Silent Majority the voice it never had. They will for organizing an active resistance to The Marxist Onada and his gang of angry commies.
When ever I feel despondant about my country, I make myself remember one thing—socialism fails every time it’s tried. Also remember that at least 47% of voters did no choose Onada.
I remain cautiously optimistic that ultimately there will be a political solution—i.e. voters turn The Marxist Onada out of office. But I’m also preparing myself for the possibility that the commies will try to retain their grip on power even if they are rejected.
I do not understand how a book on the POUM and its opposition to the Communists proves your point.
Sorry, but that doesn’t explain how “our” elites created Marxism and the Soviet Union. You have provided an interesting footnote to history, and one that the Supreme Court can still eliminate, reduce, or modify — or can I take it for granted that our judicial system is Marxist?
Communists were deeply involved at key points of a Republican dominated American government as sponsored by agents of corporate wealth as early as the 19th century. They instituted the founding bases upon which they are constructing global government today. That alone proves my point.
By "our own elites" I was referring to the sponsors of Western capitalism, the international banking class that funded the Bund der Gerechten and their American cohorts, whose material participation in the industrial development of the Soviet Union is a matter of record.
By the late 19th Century, there was significant participation in that group from among American financial interests. It was these folks who sent their kids to study under Marxists in Europe. I have records of such extending back to the 1850s, including members of the Walker family (in particular, an influential cousin of George Herbert Walker (33° Mason, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, and participant on Jekyll Island)).
You have provided an interesting footnote to history, and one that the Supreme Court can still eliminate, reduce, or modify — or can I take it for granted that our judicial system is Marxist?
It's more a glint off the tip of an iceberg. Consider how the treaty power was inserted into the Constitution for the United States at its original drafting, which has since become the linchpin of its downfall. Once you've absorbed that, if you are still interested, there is one more that completes the picture. It is my opinion (which I shared with Wayne Hage) that it was the lenders to the young republic who called the shots on the treaty power. Young Mr. Hamilton went for it to get sufficient funds to protect the nation from European reconquest. He did not understand the consequences, although his nemesis Mr. Henry certainly did.
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.