Posted on 03/29/2006 10:18:30 AM PST by factfinder200
As students of conspiracy arguments know, the Birch Society is quite fond of citing Anatoli Golitsyn's assertions to substantiate JBS arguments about successful Soviet deception operations against the United States and the western world. In fact, the JBS recommends and sells both of Golitsyn's books.
There is, however, a major dilemma contained within JBS arguments which accept Golitsyn's assertions.
Let's review some background information about what Golitsyn told western intelligence agencies after his defection. The following numbered excerpts come from Edward Jay Epstein's website (link below). Epstein authored the 1989 book, Deception: The Invisible War Between the KGB and the CIA
My comments (preceded by asterisks ***) appear underneath each excerpt.
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/archived/looking2.htm
(1) KGB RE-ORGANIZATION IN 1959 -- based upon Golitsyn's explanation.
"Angleton wanted to know more about the Soviet apparatus for deception. Why had the KGB moved from being a espionage to deception? Why had it been re-organized?"
"Golitsyn suggested that it all began with a Politburo assessment in the mid 1950s that the Soviet Union would be unlikely to prevail in a nuclear war. It followed that if it was to win against the West, it would be by fraud rather than force. For this singular purpose, Soviet intelligence would have to undertake the tricky job of manipulating the information western leaders received."
*** But given JBS premises, why would the Soviet leadership (and its intelligence assets) perceive a need to "manipulate" information that western leaders received during the 1950's and 1960's?
According to the Birch Society paradigm, as explained by Robert Welch in "The Politician" and elsewhere, the United States, France, and Germany were already being led by Communist agents and sympathizers (i.e. Eisenhower, DeGaulle and Willie Brandt) and the major institutions of western countries were controlled and dominated by equally disloyal individuals.
Let's briefly review some pertinent Welch comments and then ask an obvious question:
On page 279 of the original version of The Politician, Welch discussed the 3 stages by which Communists came to control the U.S. Presidency. In stages 1 and 2, FDR and Truman were "used" by Communists.
In Truman's case, according to Welch, he was used "with his knowledge and acquiescence, as the price he consciously paid for their making him President."
Then Welch discusses the "3rd stage":
"In the third stage, in my own firm opinion, the Communists have one of their own actually in the Presidency. For this third man, Eisenhower, there is only one possible word to describe his purposes and his actions. That word is treason." [The Politician, unpublished version, page 268.]
If that wording is not explicit enough, here is another formulation by Welch from page 266. I have used CAPS on one portion for emphasis.
"For the sake of honesty, however, I want to confess here my own conviction that Eisenhower's motivation is more ideological than opportunistic. Or, to put it bluntly, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT HE HAS BEEN SYMPATHETIC TO ULTIMATE COMMUNIST AIMS, REALISTICALLY WILLING TO USE COMMUNIST MEANS TO HELP THEM ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS, KNOWINGLY ACCEPTING AND ABIDING BY COMMUNIST ORDERS, AND CONSCIOUSLY SERVING THE COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY FOR ALL OF HIS ADULT LIFE."
During this period, Robert Welch also believed that the U.S. State Department, Defense Department, and our CIA were controlled and run by Communist agents or sympathizers.
In private remarks on January 9, 1960 to the first meeting of the JBS National Council, Welch made these observations about the gravity of our situation:
"Today, gentlemen, I can assure you, without the slightest doubt in my own mind, that the takeover at the top is, for all practical purposes, virtually complete. Whether you like it or not, or whether you believe it or not, our Federal Government is already, literally in the hands of the Communists." ...
"Our State Department is loaded with Communists from top to bottom, to the extent that our roll call of Ambassadors almost sounds like a list somebody has put together to start a Communist front." ...
"Our Central Intelligence Agency under Allen Dulles is nothing more or less than an agency to promote Communism throughout the world...Almost all the other Departments are loaded with Communists and Communist sympathizers. And this generalization most specifically does include our whole Defense Department."
*** Bottom-Line question: Given this state of affairs, why would the Soviets need to engage in any sort of disinformation or deception campaigns? Why would they even need KGB operatives in Western countries?
Everything Communist leaders (a) needed to know or (b) wanted done, presumably could (in the Birch Society scheme of things) have been quickly and easily accomplished merely by picking up a telephone and calling their "agents" and "sympathizers" who already were in the supreme positions of power within western countries---right?
(2) "Conspirators" and the "Jewish" question.
Let's consider the relevance of the following passages to comments routinely made by some Yahoo group members.
"Under Shelepin, during this reorganization, Golitsyn worked on an analysis intended to demonstrate how conventional spying could be subordinated to deception goals, without potentially compromising the secrecy of the latter. The intrinsic problem was that KGB officers had to be in contact with western intelligence officers either to recruit them or to pass them disinformation, and, this presented the opportunity to defect or otherwise be compromised.
"In fact, scores of Soviet intelligence officers had either defected or offered information to the CIA since the end of the war. While some of these sources could be assumed to be dispatched defectors from the KGB, a large number of the others turned out to be legitimate. How could the KGB sustain deceptions-- if it was probable that some of its officers would defect or otherwise betray its secret."
"Golitsyn explained that the KGB re-organization in 1958-1959 was designed to avoid this vulnerability. It effectively separated the KGB into two distinct entities. An outer and inner KGB."
"The "outer" KGB was made up of personnel who, out of necessity, had to be in contact with foreigners, and were therefore vulnerable to being compromised. It included KGB recruiters and spotters posted to embassies and missions ,military attaches, disinformation and propaganda agents and illegal case officers who worked abroad. Since they had to be in touch with Westerners, if only to attempt to recruit them as spies, they were assumed to be "doomed spies". A certain percentage would, by the law of probability would be caught. These "doomed spies" were the equivalent of pilots sent on raids over enemy territory. They were not only restricted from knowing any state secrets (other than what was necessary for their mission), but they were purposefully briefed on what it was useful for the enemy to learn if they were captured."
"The "inner" KGB was the real repository of secrets. It was limited to a small number of trusted officers, under the direct supervision of the Politburo, who planned, orchestrated, controlled and analyzed the operations. (According to Golitsyn, all potential security risks, which included most of the officers of Jewish descent, were transferred into the outer service in preparation for the reorganization)."
*** 1. How come there are not "scores" of defectors from the "conspiracy" which contemporary "CFR-New World Order" conspiracy proponents allege has been operating for decades? How is this conspiracy organized and operated differently to permanently preclude defectors and disillusioned members from revealing confidential and damaging information?
*** 2. Why were "officers of Jewish descent" considered "potential security risks" if, as some conspiracy adherents insist, Jews were the primary movers and shakers within the Soviet system?
There are some areas in which the JBS and JR Nyquist/The Final Phase disagree, such as the extent of western cabals and their role in all of this.
It may be slightly dated, but it is a good one to ponder.
How come that the same selfish and bumbling nomenklaturists like KGB Kryuchkov completely and mizerably failed even in a very simple task of their anti-Gorbachev coup, but at the same time were purportedly competent in very long term strategic planning and execution on the global scale?
mizerably=miserably. Need more caffeine.
What does this have to do with the unprecedented scale and cover up of the Communist Genocide of the 20th Century?
"Cover up of the Communist Genocide"> -- you've got to be kidding!
Entire books and doctoral dissertations have been written about it for decades. Many of the original reports of Soviet gulags and human rights abuses originated with emigres from the Soviet Union who were interviewed by Western scholars and intelligence agencies.
You obviously have not done even the most cursory examination of the historical record and just have some sort of agenda you want to promote.
See, for example:
"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression" originally published in Europe, then picked up by Harvard University Press in 1999. It was described in a New York Times review as:
"An 800-page compendium of the crimes of Communist regimes worldwide, recorded and analyzed in ghastly detail by a team of scholars. The "notes" section of the book consists of 62 pages of bibliographic citations to substantiate the assertions made in the book. This documentation relies upon previous scholarly works from the 1920's forward. So much for your falsehood about a "coverup".
Also see such journals as "American Communist History" and the massive bibliography and research guide on Communism and Anti-Communism at:
http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page94.html
http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page94.html
The US recognized the Soviet Genocide only in 1987. That amounts to 55 years of cover up if my cyphering is right - and your friends in the Kremlin still deny it.
Its better to be suspected of being a lackey than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.
Spanalot: "My friends" in the Kremlin? Is that the manner in which you engage in honest debate or discussion?
And what do you mean by the U.S. recognized Soviet genocide "only in 1987"?
I again refer you to the book I cited in my previous message. The bibliogaphy contains 62 pages of documentation. That documentation refers to books and articles about Soviet oppression and violations of human rights and murders and gulags, etc. starting with reports in the 1920's -- not 1987!
Much of the scholarship done in our country about Soviet genocide is based upon primary source documents archived at our colleges and universities -- such as the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
I suggest that you go to a library and do some research before making a fool of yourself by claiming that the U.S. never recognized the Soviet genocide until 1987. That is an insult not only to our intelligence but to the many brave and principled human beings who risked their lives and gave data about Soviet genocide to Western intelligence agencies as well as scholars and researchers.
Incidentally, I have in my possession copies of FBI documents from the 1940's and 1950's which summarize the data which YOU falsely claim was never even recognized until 1987. Voluminous amounts of Congressional hearings and reports documented it in painstaking detail.
Go peddle your b/s somewhere where only morons participate in discussions with you and, thus, will accept your falsehoods without question.
"And what do you mean by the U.S. recognized Soviet genocide "only in 1987"? "
My bad - it was only in 1988 did the US recognize the Russian genocide in Ukraine - something Russia still denies.
http://www.faminegenocide.com/resources/bilinsky.html
"That documentation refers to books and articles about Soviet oppression and violations of human rights and murders and gulags, etc. starting with reports"
You apparently are unaware of the difference between murder and "genocide".
You're dreaming if you thing Holdomor denial is not a big problem.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&edition=us&q=ukraine+genocide+denial&btnG=Search
Interesting that you have now changed the subject from a generic discussion of "Soviet genocide" to your link to a specific instance (i.e. Ukraine). Apparently, you have difficulty with precision in your use of the English language.
However, as even your own link shows with respect to Ukraine, there was evidence presented BEFORE 1988 re: the Ukranian genocide.
With respect to your comment that I don't understand the difference between "murder" vs "genocide"
MURDER:
noun: unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being
GENOCIDE:
noun: systematic killing of a racial or cultural group
United States scholars, researchers, and politicians recognized Soviet GENOCIDE years and decades before 1988 -- so stop playing stupid word games or semantic parsing of terms.
I suggest you review some of the following documents for evidence and discussion about Soviet genocide.
I'm only listing a representative sample merely to indicate how absurd your comments thus far have been.
I won't even get into all of the anti-Communist organizations that published articles and booklets pertaining to Soviet genocide and murder and oppression -- but suffice it to say that such organizations have existed since the 1920's throughout the non-Communist world. In our country, for example, there were groups such as American Coalition of Patriotic Societies (founded in the 1920's) and The Council Against Communist Aggression founded in February 1951 headed by Arthur McDowell.
I also will not bother to list the scores of Congressional hearings and reports which dealt, in one way or another, with Soviet violations of human rights and mass murder, etc.
I will not respond further to your nonsense because you obviously have never done even the most cursory investigation into this subject matter.
I really don't understand your point and save your ad hominems for your 6th grade students as I presume that is your vocation.
I conducted my first primary research on the RUSSIAN GENOCIDE in Ukraine in 1972 and recognition of this RUSSIAN GENOCIDE is slow in coming.
Now go cry to the Mod if you like.
Not surprising you now disingenuously claim that you "don't understand my point"
This exchange started because of your comment in message #6 which was as follows:
"What does this have to do with the unprecedented scale and cover up of the Communist Genocide of the 20th Century?"
Notice---no reference to Ukraine. Notice, too, the context of this exchange, i.e. you responded to my message about contemporary conspiracy theory adherents who endorse Anatoli Golitsyn's arguments but, simultaneously, they ignore the inherent repudiation by Golitsyn of their fundamental premises!
Finally, notice that I responded with specific factual evidence which refutes your false contentions that
(1) there has been some sort of "coverup" of "Communist genocide" --and--
(2) "The US recognized the Soviet Genocide only in 1987."
Even when you changed the subject to limit your discussion to Ukraine --- you still can't get your facts straight. Contrary to your assertion that:
"...it was only in 1988 did the US recognize the Russian genocide in Ukraine "... I provided specific data which refutes that contention --and-- I repeat it below again.
Finally: MY "ad hominems" ??
YOU started this exchange by a despicable and shameful attempt to link me with Communists ["and your friends in the Kremlin still deny it."] ~~~~~ Look in the mirror for an indisputable example of someone who uses "ad hominem" attacks instead of engaging in a rational, amicable discussion and presenting factual evidence.
----- UKRAINE GENOCIDE ONLY RECOGNIZED IN 1988??? ------
Human rights and genocide in the Baltic States :
[a statement submitted to the delegations to the United Nations General Assembly, September 1950] /
Author: Kaelas, Aleksander.
Publication: Stockholm : Estonian Information Centre, 1950
Commission on the Ukraine Famine Act, CIS-NO: 85-H381-24, SOURCE: Committee on Foreign Affairs. House, DOC-TYPE: Hearing, DATE: Oct. 3, 1984, 37pp
Ukrainian Famine of 1932 and 1933, CIS-NO: 85-S381-5, SOURCE: Committee on Foreign Relations. Senate, DOC-TYPE: Hearing, DOC-NO: S. Hrg. 98-982, DATE: Aug. 1, 1984, 137pp
Collectivization and Its Impact on the Ukrainian Population and on Soviet Agricultural Productivity, CIS-NO: 84-S161-26, SOURCE: Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Senate, DOC-TYPE: Hearing, DOC-NO: S. Hrg. 98-959, DATE: Nov. 15, 1983, 124pp
And this was based upon 5-minutes of cursory research. If I took 30 minutes, I could cite numerous legislative hearings, reports, books, newspaper and magazine articles from the 1940's forward.
If I tell you one more time it will be the 6th time.
YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENOCIDE RECOGNITION AND THE LESSER EFFORTS YOU HAVE CITED.
I have forgotten more about this subject than you have ever learned and your ability to google will never, ever rectify this.
How would you know that I have no concept? What questions did you ask about me or my research?
When you refer to "lesser efforts you have cited" --- are you including the 1958 report that I cited? I list it here again for your benefit:
The Soviet empire: prison house of nations and races;
a study in genocide, discrimination, and abuse of power.
Library of Congress., Legislative Reference Service.
Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1958
HAVE YOU READ THIS REPORT? If you HAVE read it -- then how was it defective based upon your research?
Similarly, have you read: "Genocide in the USSR; studies in group destruction by Nikolai K Deker, 1958? If you HAVE read it -- then how was it defective based upon your research?
I also mentioned "The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression."
Have you read its discussion about the Ukraine---particularly on pages 94-98 and 225-230 where it describes "thousands massacred" and "hundreds of villages burned" and "extraordinary violence against the civilian population" and "massive executions" of peasants, as well as "mass deportations" etc?
From page 225, referring to Soviet brutality in Ukrainian gulags as the German Army advanced into Russia: "This was particularly the case in western Ukraine, where at the end of June 1941 the NKVD massacred 10,000 prisoners in Lviv, 1200 in the prison at Lutsk, 1500 in Stanislowow, and 500 in Dubno."
And the sources cited by the Black Book authors include such prominent historical works as: Daniel Pipes: "Russia Under The Bolshevik Regime" and Orlando Figes: "Peasant Russia, Civil War" -- both of which are documented with voluminous footnotes of material originating many decades before YOUR reference to 1988!
If you HAVE read these books --- how are they defective, based upon your research?
Incidentally, here is a link to a September 1960 article which refers to a "massacre of innocent prisoners" in Ukraine as reported in 1941 (!) by Swedish and Swiss newspapers.
http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/1960/1796011.shtml
Even though you limited the context of your original comments to refer only to "genocide" in Ukraine -- you have presented nothing thus far to indicate the accuracy of your 1988 threshold comment.
Obviously, you have an agenda. You posted your original message not because you genuinely had any interest in the subject matter I raised (i.e. Golitsyn vs contemporary conspiracy theorists).
Instead, you have an agenda and you want recognition of your self-proclaimed and allegedly indisputable status as an expert on this subject matter.
I repeat: you are playing word games. Whether one uses the term "genocide" or "mass murder" or "crimes against humanity" --- the United States has recognized Soviet barbarism since the 1920's --- so hijack somebody's else's posting to continue your "discussion".
From my point of view, you have only succeeded in looking full of green eyed jealousy, unless of course your attacks have an ulterior motive.
:)Easy Does It:)
My point is that toe dancing on the subject of the motives of the Sovet Union re: isolated vigenttes fails to see the forest for the trees - that the Kremlin is the agent of Genocide for 100 million in the last century.
The first major episode of Genocide was in Ukraine and it is something Russia and their Usefull Idiots still deny.
This includes the NYTimes which was an agent of the cover up (and still is) as well as leftists in general.
BUT, it appears that you two seem to think otherwise.
There will be recognition when they start putting it into public school curriculums and there will be recognition when we get Nuremburg trials to put some of these communist scum in prison and extract reparations from those that benefited.
Have I made myself extremely clear?
You must be pretty skinny with all the exercise you get jumping to conclusions. You have no idea what I think on this subject. I haven't formed an opinion yet.
I would like to see some civil discussion so that I could be enlightened.
Stick to the subject matter and stay away from the personal attacks, if you want to be heard.
:)Easy Does It:)
The first major episode of Genocide was in Ukraine and it is something Russia and their Usefull Idiots still deny. This includes the NYTimes which was an agent of the cover up (and still is) as well as leftists in general.
Any literate person knows that the NY Times covered (and did not "cover up") Soviet genocide in general, and the Ukrainian episode in particular. For example, see the following NY Times articles.
One point about historical scholarship and reporting: initially there can be relatively few reports about some horrific matter simply because there are no credible eye-witness reports OR because whatever reports exist cannot be verified or they contain lots of contradictory information. On other occasions, release of credible data may compromise the identity of confidential sources and, therefore, put them and/or their families in physical jeopardy. So anyone can make sweeping derogatory generalizations about a time-line when "no reports" or false reports are published---but that often can easily be explained by circumstances -- not malignant motivation.
------------New York Times Articles-------------
ASSEMBLY WILL ACT ON GENOCIDE STUDY: Ukraine, Soviet Union Object to Inclusion on Agenda--Also Oppose Translating Classics, Nov 6, 1946, p19
UKRAINE GROUPS URGE U.N. CHECK ON SOVIET Nov 19, 1947. p. 18
GENOCIDE SURVEY URGED: Ukrainian Group Here Asks U.N. to Make Inquiry in Europe Nov 23, 1947, p21
BERLE SAYS REDS PRACTICE GENOCIDE: Charges Racial Extermination Exists Today in Ukraine and Baltic States Mar 9, 1949, p4
WEST, EAST FLING CHARGES ON LABOR: Briton in U. N. Cites Exodus of 10,000,000 Refugees From Soviet-Ruled Areas By SAM POPE BREWER, Oct 16, 1949, p26
To Outlaw Genocide: Adoption of Convention Is Urged in Citing Soviet Actions (Oct 24, 1949. p. 22
UKRAINE GENOCIDE BY SOVIET ALLEGED: Kremlin Seeks to End Hope of Resistance, Exile Says Here --U.N. Is Urged to Act New York Times Nov 11, 1951. p. 29
UKRAINIANS PRESSING DRIVE FOR FREEDOM Jul 5, 1952, p2
ACTION URGED ON GENOCIDE Jul 16, 52, page 24
IN ADDITION: the NY Times published lengthy favorable book reviews which discussed Soviet genocide in general and Ukrainian genocide in particular. For example:
Book Review: THE HARVEST OF SORROW By Craig R. Whitney. New York, N.Y.: Oct 26, 1986, p442
Book Review: THE GREAT TERROR A Reassessment. By Robert Conquest. 570 pp. New York: Oxford University Press. $24.95. By Norman Davies. New York Times: May 13, 1990. p. BR20
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.