Roots of Soviet Terror

Soviet Analyst | Sept Oct 2001 | Soviet Analyst

[Askel5]

---

It should be noted that not only did the terror campaign demystify Russian rulers in the eyes of the people but it also caused the Government to overreact.

From 1879 onwards, the Imperial Government introduced a stream of extremely harsh counter measures meant to prevent terror, but which had the effect of alienating moderate groups in Russia.

In the long run this made it impossible for the regime to ever secure the support of moderately conservative and liberal elements in Russian society; so it was left to fall, isolated and alone, in 1917.

--- Richard Pipes

---

THE ROOTS OF SOVIET TERROR

According to Professor Richard Pipes, former Director of the Russian Research Center at Harvard University, "the roots of Soviet terrorism, indeed of modern terrorism, date back to 1879"(6), when a Congress of an organization called Narodnaya Volya (The People's Will) met in the small Russian town of Lipetsk. On 1st March 1881, this group succeeded, after a succession of failures, in murdering Tzar Alexander II, even though he was known as the Tzar Liberator, because he had freed the Russian serfs in 1861.

The philosophical underpinnings of the group, and of Soviet-spawned terrorism, may be found in the Catechism of the Revolutionary by Sergei Nechaiev (assisted by his mentor, the former artillery officer, Michael Bakunin). The son of a priest (Stalin studied to be a priest), and one of the most evil men who ever lived, Nechaiev "passionately embraced the cause of revolution.

In 1869, he organized a society in Moscow for the purpose of preparing mass insurrection. He shrank from nothing to attract followers, resorting to deceipt, terrorism and murder.(7) By studying Nechaiev's hideous writings, today's student of continuing World Revolution (and of its enhanced weapon, terrorism) can gain the necessary insight into the mentality we are confronted with. For in the Catechism, Nechaiev wrote:

The Revolutionist is a doomed man. He has no private interests, no affairs, sentiments, ties, property nor even a name of his own … heart and soul, not merely by word but by deed, he has severed every link with the social order and … the … civilized world.

He is its merciless enemy and continues to inhabit it with only one purpose: to destroy it …

Everything which promotes the success of the Revolution is moral; everything which hinders it is immoral. The nature of the true revolutionist excludes all romanticism, all tenderness, all ecstasy, all love.

[…] … after falling out with Michael Bakunin and the breakup of his organization by the Tzarist police, which led to the arrest of some 300 operatives, Nechaiev had fled to Switzerland. Bakunin left this description of his erstwhile terrorism comrade:

Nechaiev … is as ruthless with himself as he is with others. He is a fanatic, but a very dangerous one, association with whom may be fatal to all concerned. His methods are abhorrent.

He has come to the conclusion that to create a workable organization one must use as a basis the philosophy of Machiavelli and adopt the motto of the Jesuits: "Violence for the Body; lies for the soul."

With the exception of … the chosen leaders, all the members should serve as blind tools in the hands of those leaders …. It is permissible to deceive these members, rob them, and even murder them if necessary. They are merely cannon fodder for conspiracies.

For the good of the cause, he must be allowed to gain full mastery over your person, even against your will."

Professor Pipes explained why "The People's Will" is the model for the modern terrorist organization, just as Nechaiev's Catechism of the Revolutionary established the mindset which infects the barbarous hordes of Muslim and Marxist terrorist who have 'graduated' from terrorism training camps modeled on those originally established under the supervision of KGB Colonel Kotchergine in 1966 [around Havana, Cuba some 10 months after the Jan. '66 Tricontinental Conference of 513 delegates representing 83 groups from the Third World]:

The People's Will was the first to consider the enemy to be the whole system … capitalism, religion, law and everything which kept the body politic intact. (12)

The successor, both in method and also partly in respect of ideology, to the Narodnaya Volya movement, was the party of the Social Revolutionaries (SRs), who launched attacks on the Russian Imperial Government in the early years of the 20th century with the deliberate purpose of destroying the awe in which the Russian population held the regime.

[...]

Professor Pipes observed:

They felt that as long as people feared the Government, and believed it to be omnipotent, there was no possibility of Revolution. So the murder of Government officials or supporters of the Government was an important step in causing the numinous glow surrounding the government to evanesce.

The SR campaign succeeded to a remarkable extent. Almost all contemporary observers note that after 1905, the traditional loyalty and belief of the Russian peasant in the Monarchy were broken. There was [by now] a great deal of contempt on the part of the peasant for the regime. This facilitated the events of 1917.

THE DEFENCE OF TERRORISM BY TROTSKY

It was of course Leon Trotsky (Braunstein) who followed in the footsteps of Nechaiev and Bakunin by adding to the literature of terrorism with his tome entitled The Defense of Terrorism, also called Terrorism and Communism, which appeared in the English language in 1921.(13) On page 23 of this polemical work, Trotsky proclaimed that:

The man who repudiates terrorism in principle – i.e., repudiates measures of suppression and intimidation towards determined armed counter-revolution, must reject all idea of the political supremacy of the working-class and its revolutionary dictatorship. The man who repudiates the dictatorship of the proletariat repudiates the Socialist Revolution, and digs the grave of Socialism.

This piece of subtle "backwards reasoning" was framed so as to imply that the Communists' 'sacred cows' would be violated by anyone who denied the necessity of terrorism to enhance the prospects for Revolution. In other words, those who did not support terrorism were not revolutionaries, and neither were they even socialists: they were scum, to be despised and destroyed.

Trotsky's lust for blood evidently knew no bounds, even though he was by far the most literate and profound of the founding revolutionaries:

That the proletariat will have to pay with blood, that, in the struggle for the conquest of power and for its consolidation, the proletariat will not only have to be killed, but [will also have to] kill – of this, no serious revolutionary can ever have any doubt … One cannot live by phrases about the great truth that under Socialism we shall need no Red Terror.

But Trotsky himself attributed the revolutionary doctrine that Communism cannot be "constructed" without terrorism to Lenin. According to David Shub, an exiled Russian revolutionary, and author of a classic short life of Lenin(14), "Lenin at every opportunity kept hammering into our heads that terror was unavoidable." In order to give physical expression to his demonic desire to embark upon state terror […(15)…] Lenin identified and appointed the son of a rich Polish landowner named Felix Dzerzhinsky, from Poland's Vilno province.

"He was fair, slightly round-shouldered, with a short pointed beard and transparent eyes with dilated pupils," wrote Shrub. "There were moments when his friendly smile gave way to icy sternness. At such times, his eyes and ascetic bloodless lips revealed a demoniac fanaticism. Rigorous self-denial, incorrigible honesty, and a frigid indifference to the opinions of others, completed his make-up. His natural modesty, unassuming air and quiet manners set him apart."

"On 20th December 1917, Lenin instructed Dzherzhinsky to organize an Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-revolution and Speculation. Under the name Cheka, the Soviet secret police soon became the symbol for a system of terror such as the world has never seen.(16)

The Cheka's initial headquarters was the Smolny Institute a former girls' school in Leningrad – the selfsame building in which Anatoliy Sobchak presided as Mayor of St. Petersburg, and to which Vladimir Putin was … posted after … functioning as 'assistant' to the 'dean' of Leningrad University [immediately following] his return from Russia from East Germany [where he had] successfully directed … removal of East European regimes and their replacement by … 'non'-communists in 1989-1990]. (17) […]

Thus the Soviet regime, nurtured in the hellish tradition of Nechaiev's "People's Will" aberration, bathed itself in blood from the outset. Indeed, as Trotsky proclaimed, the revolution makes no sense without terror …

Since we are now truly living in the era of the World Revolution, terror has been exported by the Soviets globally. The only factor preventing the West from understanding and accepting this obvious truth is … the … misguided belief that the Leninist Soviet revolutionaries abandoned, all of a sudden, their global revolutionary intentions and ideology and suddenly became 'like us.'

[ "I felt guilty." V. Putin ]

DEMYSTIFICATION AND OFFICIAL OVERREACTION

The indiscriminate use of terror adopted with relish (even though Lenin's secretary said that Dzerzhinksy's liquidation of over 1,500 inmates in the early stages of the Red Terror was 'a mistake') also had another, more subtle effect, which should (but won't) serve as a warning to President Bush and Tony Blair in the present circumstances.

As Pipes explained:

It should be noted that not only did the terror campaign demystify Russian rulers in the eyes of the people but it also caused the Government to overreact.

From 1879 onwards, the Imperial Government introduced a stream of extremely harsh counter measures meant to prevent terror, but which had the effect of alienating moderate groups in Russia.

In the long run this made it impossible for the regime to ever secure the support of moderately conservative and liberal elements in Russian society; so it was left to fall, isolated and alone, in 1917.

_____________________
(6) -- Pipes, Professor Richard, International Terrorism: the Soviet Connection, The Jonathan Institute, proceedings of the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism, 2-5 July 1979, page 11.
(7) -- Lenin, David Shub (who was personally acquainted with many of the Bolshevik leaders, including Lenin, Trotsky and Kukharin, as well as the socialist Kerensky), Mentor Books and Doubleday & Co., Inc. New York 1950-1962.
(8) -- Paris-Match 4th November 1977, cited by Sterling, The Terror Network, op cit [Claire Sterling "The Terror Network: The Secret War of International Terrorism" Holt-Rinehard and Winston, 1981.]
(9) -- Stefan Possony and Francis Bouchey, International Terrorism: The Communist Connection, page 47, Hoover Institute for the Study of War and Peace; and Jean-Pierre Vigier, Le Monde, Paris, 27th October 1967; both cited by Claire Sterling, op cit.
(10) -- Claire Sterling, op cit. p. 14.
(11) -- Lenin, David Shub, op cit., pp. 15-16
(12) -- Pipes, Richards, International Terrorism: The Soviet Connection, op cit., p. 12.
(13) -- Leon Trotsky, The Defense of Terrorism (Terrorism and Communism), 1921, The Labour Publishing Company & George Allen and Unwin
(14) -- Lenin, David Shub, op cit.
(15) -- "We set ourselves the ultimate aim of destroying the state," V.I. Lenin, State and Revolution, International Publishers, New York, 1961 Edition, p. 68.
(16) -- Lenin, David Shub, op cit., pp. 156
(17) -- See, Soviet Analyst, Vol. 27, NO. 4, pp. 6-7.
(18) -- David Shub, op cit., pp. 156

[TapTheSource]

You're right, it is impossible to have a serious debate on this subject if you are unwilling to consult God's Word. Still, if you read the two books I suggested, I think you will A) be forced to exonerate M. Begin and the Irgun if you wish to be consistent with your own standard (yes, it is you who are being inconsistent when it comes to Israel) B) realize that Israel was (and is) a major battleground between religious Jews and the Communists (religious Jews backed by millions of Christians versus international Communism, and religious Jews versus socialist and Communist Jews who were working with the Communists to "internationalize" control of Eretz Israel as per their plan to create a pan-Arab regional government dominated by Communists). The difference between the two sides is as clear as night and day. I'm starting to think you have theological reasons for not learning the TRUTH about the founding of Israel.

[Askel5]

=== I'm starting to think you have theological reasons for not learning the TRUTH about the founding of Israel.


Given the bent reasoning at the core of your so-called intellectual premises on the subject, comments like this are not geared to elicit anything like a serious response from me.

[Askel5]

=== control of Eretz Israel as per their plan to create a pan-Arab regional government dominated by Communists


Is it the way the secularists call themselves "Jews" that throws you?

I know this sort of thing is a huge problem here at home where the Faithbased dutifully follow anyone who hangs out a "Pro-life" shingle.

[Askel5]

Well, Pipes is not someone with whom I've much in common but the facts and reasoning he lays out still are valuable where -- as here -- they are on point and valid.

[TapTheSource]

"Given the bent reasoning at the core of your so-called intellectual premises on the subject, comments like this are not geared to elicit anything like a serious response from me."

So you don't have theological presuppositions that influence your thinking re: the founding of Israel? (serious question)

[OHelix]

Found this thread on google. Ping for re-read later.

[TapTheSource]

PS Don't worry, your position on Israel, whatever that might be (you are still being oftly cagey about this whole thing), does not threaten me one bit. If you are afraid to speak the truth as you see it on this forum, isn't that itself a form of pragmatism? I don't envision a flame-fest complete with insults and ad homonym (and if anyone joins in and starts veering the debate in that direction, I propose we cease the debate immediately and pick it up somewhere else). I see both of us as honest people who just happen to disagree in one or more areas (but who agree on a whole lot more). Of course, I also maintain that you are objectively WRONG, and I am objectively RIGHT. But it would seem I am confident enough in my position to risk having it knocked down by you, whereas you keep your position a closely guarded secret. State your case in plain English, and let the debates begin!!!

[TapTheSource]

Perhaps this is a good place to start. What is your position/critique of the following article???

---

Russia's Aims in the Middle East (Wake Up America!)
Anti-CommunistAnalyst

Posted on 10/28/2004 6:31:25 PM PDT by TapTheSource

Anti-communist analyst note:

[Even though this important article has been written 10 years ago by comparing the facts with the reality of the situation in the Middle East today, the facts of this article speak for themselves.]

Inside Story: World Report July, 1994

The SHADOW behind the Middle East Peace Conference

Copyright (c) 1994 by Inside Story Communications

Since at least 1931, international Communism has sought to conquer the Middle East through the "pan-Arab" movement.1 According to plans, individual Arab nations would be "liberated" from colonial rule, then fused into a united Arab regional government-a precursor to world government. Strategically, the Middle East contains such vital assets as the Suez Canal and oil reserves, and provides access to the Mediterranean Sea as well as to three continents.

Naturally, the formation of the state of Israel in 1948 began interfering with Communist plans. Thus the Communists quickly set about to destroy that Jewish nation. The pro-Soviet Nasser regime of Egypt created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1964, and placed in its leadership such recruits as Yasser Arafat, a veteran of the Communist revolution in Algeria.2 The PLO's mission: sponsor revolutions to overthrow the non-Communist governments of Israel, Iran, Turkey, and the Arab nations.

But after five wars and three decades of revolution, the Communists could see by 1989 that the frontal approach would not soon topple Jerusalem. At that point, the Soviet Bloc switched to a new strategy of deception. By faking the death of Communism, Moscow has finally opened the door to its victory. And behind its newly-accelerating drive to eliminate Israel stands its architect, the latest head of the Soviet secret police.

His name is Yevgeniy Primakov.

The shadow is cast...

By the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Soviets could see that Israel would never be defeated through direct conflict. Despite early successes while invading Israel's buffer zones in the Sinai and the Golan Heights, Syrian and Egyptian forces soon found themselves in full retreat. Realizing that Israel would first have to yield its occupied territories before it would become militarily vulnerable, the Soviets chose a new tactic known as the "Phased Plan."

The PLO officially adopted this plan in June, 1974.3 Phase 1 would involve pressuring Israel to withdraw from its territories, upon which the PLO would establish a People's Republic of Palestine. In Phase 2, the heavily-armed Communist state would serve as the launching point for a Soviet-backed invasion of Israel.

How could Israel be induced to surrender strategic land-to the PLO, no less? The Communists decided to call for a "peace conference" between Israel, the Arab states, and the PLO. The catch, moreover, was that the Soviet Union would co-sponsor the talks. Such an international conference would pit Israel against all other participants, heightening pressure for concessions.

Soviet official Andrei Gromyko started the process in 1973, offering to open diplomatic relations with Israel in return for a peace conference. The Israelis first refused, but the damage inflicted by the Yom Kippur War changed their minds. In late 1973, Israel agreed to international talks in Geneva, Switzerland. The Soviets co-sponsored the meeting, though still refusing to recognize Israel diplomatically. Only the PLO was not officially allowed to participate.

Henry Kissinger played the key role in furthering Soviet aims.

Israeli journalist Matti Golan reported that, during the first few days of the Yom Kippur War, while the Communist governments of Yugoslavia, Algeria, Libya, Iraq, and the Soviet Union were re-supplying Egypt and Syria,4 Kissinger had delayed the emergency shipment of U.S. arms to Israel. Then, once Israel had regained its military balance and scored decisive victories, he went behind the Israelis' backs and negotiated a ceasefire directly with the Soviets. Nor was this difficult for him; as Soviet ambassador Anatoliy Dobrynin later revealed, the Soviets had quietly appointed Kissinger as their representative at the same time that he was representing the United States.5 Kissinger then pressured Israel into accepting the ceasefire, which returned portions of the Sinai peninsula to Egypt.

By 1977 the Soviets were trying to restart the Geneva talks, this time in an expanded format. Yevgeniy Primakov appeared on the scene, albeit secretly, to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin.

Primakov again dangled the promise of Soviet diplomatic relations, this time in exchange for Israel allowing the PLO into the Geneva talks. Begin refused.6

Later that year, the Soviet timetable was temporarily thrown off by the Camp David peace accords between Egypt and Israel, which were negotiated directly between the two parties. Nevertheless, the Soviets moved patiently forward, gradually preparing the noose with which to hang Israel.

Primakov was ascending the ranks of Soviet power, gradually taking control of Middle East policy. By 1983, he had become Vice President of the World Peace Council (WPC), an internationally active front for the Soviet KGB founded in 1950.7 Its president was Romesh Chandra, a Central Committee member of the Communist Party of India. But the real power resided in the hands of the Soviet KGB officer at Chandra's side. The WPC not only organized the disarmament movement in the West, but also served as a center for Soviet coordination of terrorist groups around the world, including the PLO.8 At that same time, Primakov held the post of Deputy Chairman of the Soviet Peace Committee,9 which worked out of the same Moscow office as the Soviet Afro-Asian Solidarity Committee. These groups have operated as conduits through which the KGB sends weapons and other logistical support to the PLO.10

Primakov was busy implementing Soviet policy toward Israel. In September, 1982, the Soviet Union made the first official call for an international Middle East peace conference, to negotiate for a PLO state in the Israeli territories.11 Soviet influence at the United Nations led that organization, unsurprisingly, to endorse the call in 1983. Echoing the Soviets, the U.N. called for "the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people, to participate... in all efforts, deliberations and conferences on the Middle East" for "the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in Palestine."12 Under Primakov's growing power,

Communist parties throughout the world soon joined in the chorus.

...and lengthens...

By the time Mikhail Gorbachev was taking over in 1985, the Soviet government was openly boasting that a Middle East peace conference would be one step on the road to "the ultimate triumph of communism everywhere."13 Primakov was quickly moving into the center of Soviet power, close to Gorbachev himself. Working with the Central Committee's International Department, Primakov led an elite group of Communist strategists in redesigning and accelerating the Soviet drive to destroy Israel. Gorbachev did not even participate in its design, according to foreign minister Eduard Shevardnadze.14

To put his newly-formulated theory into practice, Primakov assumed the role of "special envoy" for Gorbachev during the Persian Gulf crisis in late 1990. He used that position to travel the Middle East, drumming up support for a peace conference to negotiate over Israel's territories.15

In fact, he had already been mobilizing every available tool of diplomacy, revolution, and war to intensify the pressure on Israel. In 1987, he told the Lebanese publication Hawadith that Israel would have to attend, and allow the PLO to participate in, an international meeting before the Soviets would restore diplomatic relations. He visited the capitals of Arab states, using every bit of Soviet influence to push the Arabs into joining the call.16

In 1988, he brought Soviet advisors to Syria as part of a massive drive to arm that Communist satellite, preparing it for a state of war and placing an ominous military threat on Israel's northern perimeter.17 Revolutionary action in the West Bank and Gaza Strip was meanwhile instigated by the PLO, the Palestinian Communist Party, and Islamic Jihad starting in December of 1986-a full year before the intifada was officially recognized and named.18

Analyzing the prospects for forcing Israel into peace talks, Yasser Arafat [alleged KGB agent - HM note] could boldly declare in 1987 that "there is now for the first time an actual international consensus on the question of an international conference on a Middle East settlement" [emphasis in original].19 But despite the growing momentum, Israel itself persistently refused to enter such loaded talks. Primakov needed one more element to complete the push: a war.

The perfect man for the job was Saddam Hussein, longtime dictator of the Communist government in Iraq. Since the Iraqi-Soviet Friendship Treaty of 1972, the Iraqi secret police and military had become mere extensions of their Soviet counterparts.20 The majority of Iraqi weapons were Soviet-supplied, and five to six thousand Soviet "advisors" ran the Iraqi state from within.21 Primakov himself presumably supervised the Soviet arms shipments to Iraq leading up to, and during, the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. After Iraq set in motion the Gulf crisis, Primakov visited Hussein as Gorbachev's representative. According to British intelligence analyst Christopher Story, Primakov told Hussein to demand an international conference between Israel and the PLO as a precondition to leaving Kuwait.22 Hussein obeyed, and after the Persian Gulf War had ended in 1991, Hussein's demand was adopted by the Bush administration. Finally the Israelis could no longer resist the political heat, and attended the conference in Madrid, Spain, that October.

Primakov had completed stage one in the drive to destroy Israel.

...until darkness falls....

The Soviet Union, mainly through its KGB strategist Primakov, had carefully designed and executed the entire Middle East peace conference since 1973. Thus the "death" of Communism in 1989, and especially the "breakup" of the Soviet Union in 1991, should have ended the entire process. The whole edifice of delicately applied pressure, fragile alliances, and Communist deception should have disintegrated, leaving the PLO isolated and impotent. Most importantly, Primakov and his fellow Communist leaders should have had to flee Russia to avoid prosecution, as happened to Nazi criminals after World War II.

In fact, the exact opposite chillingly materialized. Upon seizing power in the new Russia, Boris Yeltsin promptly reorganized and expanded the KGB, making it more powerful and active than ever before. Top Communists retained their positions, and all Soviet policies continued as before-except in a newly accelerated mode. What of Primakov? He was immediately promoted, becoming Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service, the main arm of the new KGB. This places him in charge of an estimated 500,000 agents worldwide, operating in Europe, the United States, the Middle East, and elsewhere.23

Primakov quickly laid to rest any notions that the various Soviet republics or Eastern European nations would be allowed any independence from Moscow. At a December, 1991, press conference, he openly admitted that his agency was exercising its powers "to maintain a common military, economic and central intelligence network among the Republics of the former Soviet Union."24 Tens of thousands of secret police officers from East Germany and other Eastern European nations had already been incorporated into the KGB during the 1989 changes.25

At a press conference in late 1993, Primakov confirmed the warlike attitude of the "former" Soviet Union by warning NATO that he and his fellow Soviets might assume a new military posture toward the West at any time. Polish defector Zdislaw Rurarz described a follow-up question from a reporter:

Primakov was asked whether his presentation of the issue was in any way endorsed by President Boris Yeltsin. Surprisingly enough, he said that there was no need for that!26

Despite Yeltsin's membership in the Soviet Communist Party since 1961, even he serves as a mere figurehead.27 He takes his orders from the likes of Primakov and the rest of the KGB leadership, all of them hardened Communists following long-term strategy.

In the Middle East, this is being translated into a PLO victory over Israel. The alleged collapse of Communism has thrown anti-Communist forces in the West into disarray. No longer recognizing where PLO terrorism or the drive for a peace conference come from, confused anti-Communists in all countries have abandoned political opposition to such Soviet moves-effectively turning over the political arena to the left. Now that the Communists can move rapidly without significant resistance, Israel is finally yielding control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to the PLO. And Israeli Prime Minister Ytzhak Rabin has since offered to give away to Golan Heights to Communist Syria.

Unless Americans and Israelis wake up soon, Soviet forces will be dismantling the remains of a neutralized, demoralized Israel.

references

1 Agwani, M.S., Communism in the Arab East, Asia Publishing House, New York, 1969, p. 15.

2 Rees, J., "Why Americans must oppose the P.L.O.," The Review of the News, Oct. 17, 1979, p. 41.

3 Netanyahu, B., A Place Among the Nations, Bantam Books, New York, 1993, pp. 219-226.

4 Sadat, A., In Search of Identity, publisher unknown, 1978, pp. 253, 255, 264, 267; Bard, M.G. and Himelfarb, J., Myths and Facts, Near East Report, Washington DC, 1992, pp. 77-78.

5 Allen, G., Kissinger: The Secret Side of the Secretary of State, '76 Press, Seal Beach, Calif., 1976, pp. 71, 78.

6 Story, C., "Business as usual in the Middle East," Soviet Analyst, Jan. 1992, p. 15.

7 Ibid., p. 18.

8 Rees, J., Ed., The War Called Peace, Western Goals, Alexandria, VA, 1982, pp. 8-9.

9 Story, Op cit., p. 18.

10 Barron, J., KGB Today: The Hidden Hand, Reader's Digest Press, New York, 1983, pp. 264-265.

11 Davydkov, R., Ed., The Palestine Question, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1984, p. 23.

12 Ibid., pp. 235-248.

13 Petrenko, F. and Popov, V., Soviet Foreign Policy: Objectives and Principles, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1985, pp. 155, 186.

14 Story, C., Op cit., p. 19.

15 The New York Times, Nov. 17, 1990, as cited in Story, C., Op cit., p. 14.

16 Story, C., Op cit., p. 19; Ramati, Y., Global Affairs, Spring 1989, as cited in Story, Op cit., p. 17.

17 Story, C., Op cit., p. 20.

18 "Palestine: Appeal for solidarity," political statement by the Palestinian Communist Party, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Information Bulletin, March 1987, pp. 39-40; Schiff, Z. and Ya'ari, E., Intifada, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1990, chapter 2 and pp. 101-105, 198-202.

19 Arafat, Y., "We are optimistic," World Marxist Review, Sept. 1987, p. 49.

20 al-Khalil, S., Republic of Fear, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1989, pp. 12, 66.

21 Wagman, R., "Did Soviets aid Iraq?", San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Sept. 5, 1990; Lee, R.W., "Our Soviet 'Ally'," The New American, March 12, 1991, pp. 22-23.

22 Story, C., Op cit., p. 15.

23 MacAlvany, D.S., "Russian strategic deception: The 'new' Communist threat," The MacAlvany Intelligence Advisor, Jan., 1994, pp. 20-22.

24 Story, C., Op cit., p. 13.

25 MacAlvany, D.S., Op cit., p. 22.

26 Ibid., p. 22.

27 Ibid., p. 12.

[TapTheSource]

Oops...the above was meant for you.

[TapTheSource]

"Is it the way the secularists call themselves "Jews" that throws you?...I know this sort of thing is a huge problem here at home where the Faithbased dutifully follow anyone who hangs out a "Pro-life" shingle."

I'm amazed at how many Jews are willing to follow Sharon, who is simply continuing the appeasement policy of Rabin. Apparently, this is ok so long as one is perceived as a "warrior."