Replies

Worth thinking about anyways:

Jeff Nyquist:

To answer the question about suitcase nuclear attacks, it's important to clarify what we think has happened so far. For this purpose let us start by considering GRU officer Viktor Suvorov's testimony on the subject of "gray terror," which is what we began to experience with 9/11.

"The overture [i.e., the first phase of World War III] is carried out by agents of the secret services of the Soviet satellite countries and by mercenaries recruited by intermediaries. The principal method employed at this stage is "gray terror," that is, a kind of terror which is not conducted in the name of the Soviet Union. The Soviet secret services do not at this stage leave their visiting cards, or leave other people's cards. The terror is carried out in the name of already existing extremist groups not connected in any way with the Soviet Union, or in the name of fictitious organizations."

If former Czech intelligence Captain Vladimir Hucin is correct in his assertion that M. Atta was trained by the communists in Czechoslovakia, then 9/11 fits the above description of "gray terror" in which operations are carried out under a "false flag."

Why did they attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11? Why weren't nuclear devices used?

In the first place, technology exists to determine the origin of detonated nuclear devices. It would be quickly established that the devices were of Russian origin. Any in-depth investigation would eventually determine that the Russians may have given the terrorists weapons through intermediaries with the hope that they would be used on the United States. If U.S. officials reached certain "paranoid" conclusions Russia could no longer benefit by its pretense of "friendship" with the United States.

In the second place, the attack had to be of sufficient violence as to grab the attention of the Americans and focus that attention on an Islamic enemy. The process of focusing attention on al Qaeda and Saddam's Iraq is entirely diversionary. You will notice that Saddam became the main U.S. enemy about the time the Soviet Union fell. This may not be coincidental. After the 9/11 attack, U.S. analysts and leaders' are not longer worried about Russia. Whatever worries they had up to that point have paled in comparison to the new threat. Already, prior to 9/11, Russian intelligence told Bodanksy and others that bin Laden had acquired Soviet nukes via Chechnya. This news was met with skepticism in 1999 when it was first published. Now it is accepted by the U.S. government as true.

Clearly, our thinking has been "conditioned" in respect of who the enemy is and what their method of attack might be. (The enemy is al Qaeda and their method will be to use stolen Soviet nukes.)

Psychological conditioning here is everything. If the groundwork is properly laid, the misdirection makes it impossible for anyone involved to question who is ultimately behind the attacks. Even if Russian spetsnaz commandos are caught planting nuclear devices, even if the devices are found to be of Russian manufacture, the Russian alibi is well established beforehand. Nobody is going to venture the dreadful conclusion that Russia has arranged a nuclear attack on the U.S. by proxy.

Now, let us try to answer the question as to the nature of future nuclear attacks. In this regard there is more to what Col. Lunev told me about fake Arab nuclear attacks on American cities. Lunev said that within days or weeks the main Russia rocket attacks would follow.

I was taken aback because I thought the Russian attacks would have to follow within hours or days. I had never imagined that the Russian operational time frame for the precursor "gray terror" could be so drawn out. The reason for this, however, becomes clear as we examine the intended effects of nuclear terror attacks.

First, in the event of a nuclear strike on the U.S. by terrorists, the United States would be tempted to strike back at targets in countries like Syria, Libya or Iran. Such action would hurt the U.S. position internationally, isolating the United States from outside sympathy and assistance. Second, the U.S. economy would be effectively shut down by national panic. Many people would refuse to enter the cities to work. The government would not collect the taxes it needs to keep the inner-cities at peace and to pay for the military. The banks would fail. Businesses would close their doors. People would flee to the countryside. The cities would explode. Add to the mix the heavily armed assassination detachements sent by Spetsnaz or the Islamists to kill America's leaders.

Given a combination of panic, economic breakdown and state disorganization, days or weeks might serve to amplify the effects of the first nuclear attacks. My guess is that the first nuclear terror strikes will occur as a set, close together in time. Eventually, the nuclear terror would shift to military and government targets -- away from civilian targets.

In the confusion of financial and governmental collapse, with domestic panic and violence attending it all, a decapitation attack by commandos would be facilitated. Allowing the confusion to build gradually would also permit Russian intelligence assets to function, and agents of influence to intensify the process of misdirection. Once U.S. defenses were down, once command and control had been compromised, a full scale attack might be launched from Russia and China without fear of retaliation.

In such a scenario, Russia and China can always sit back and enjoy America's distress. They wouldn't have to attack right away. They could repeat the terror sequence as it suits them, and try to hijack the American response. We have to consider the possibility that any dictatorship emerging from this crisis might come under the control of Russian/Chinese agents.

When will the final attack take place?

An attack could come at any time, but I would say that 2005-2007 would be ideal if one looks at Russia's own readiness. They need more time to prepare for the exploitation of all this, and so does China.

Good grief.

Extremely relevant. All puppets have puppet masters.

Our government doesn't operate on a shoestring. Federal taxes are collected once a year - and those collected have already been spent. This isn't how our taxes work. Did you write this?

Many people would refuse to enter the cities to work. The government would not collect the taxes it needs to keep the inner-cities at peace and to pay for the military.

My first response to this article was to almost crap in my pants.

My second response is skepticism. There are a lot of reasons to believe that such a scheme simply could not be pulled off. Even if the entire USA went down (unlikely, as anyone who has either seen the way we rolled Iraq, or knows Murphy's Law can tell you), we've got nuclear sub commanders who would figure out EXACTLY what the hell was going down. And believe me, one way or the other, there would be SERIOUS, SERIOUS HELL (and I mean HELL) to pay.

Serious to the degree that we're back to MAD, or at least a mini version of it.

Besides which, the global economy is so intertwined now, any major power who attempted a Hitleresque move would be cutting their own throats economically. And the leaders of both China and Russia have fresh on their minds things like the Russian Parliament standoff, Tiennamin Square, and Nicolae Ceausescu.

No, if Russia and China want to gain dominance over the USA (and I've no doubt they'd love that), I believe there are far, far, far less painful and major-risk-laden means to try to do it.