sounds like the same crap stories told by our radical anti-American traitors here -- we just call them - kerry-ites (for now).
I would file this under the "War is Hell" category.
I don't see a single thing in here to indicate any systematic use of terror. Wanton killing of Russian women may be an atrocity and a war crime, but I fail to see how such acts would terrorize Chechens.
"Putin is a good Christian, I'm a Putin apologist PING!!!" ;)
PS Please read this interesting article:
"Postmodern Jihad: What Osama learned from The Left"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/000/553fragu.asp
I am not normally a fan of the John Birch Society but this will give you something to think about.
This reminds me of the cries of "The Jews are responsible" leveled by some of the lunatic fringe following the world trade center attacks.
Ally -
I thought another country was behind 9/11 - that country will be glad to hear another is being outed -
What of the theater?
I've read(and seen) the Russian side of events in the area of which is spoken - Their story also told of "war crimes" - only being carried out by the other side. Much more horrible than the story "told" by the woman. Who to believe - ?
What a friggin' joke The New American is.
I know they deliberately targeted and butchered those teachers and kids in Beslan. I know they use their own children for human shields and human bombs to kill Jewish kids on buses in Israel. I know they come to live in our country and fly planes into buildings and kill thousands of innocent men, women and children.
No I don't know about Putin but I have seen Islam and it's followers and what their plan for humanity is with my own eyes.
If Putin will deal with this vermin that follows the teachings of Mohammad I'll cheer him on.
I lived through the cold war and as bad as the Russians where I don't remember any of the western worlds children and citizens being indiscriminately slaughtered by Russian suicide bombers.
Islamic beasts have been trying to convince us that they will not live on the same the planet with anybody but their own. Well, they've convinced me.
No more benefit of the doubt from me. If you follow the teachings of Mohammad or the Koran you are the enemy of all I believe in. Period.
>Wood’s article, entitled "Chechnya’s civilians put to the
>sword," continued with Mrs. Goncharuk’s story...
Perhaps someday we will be lucky enough to live to see Wood write an article titled "All Chechnya's civilians put to the sword..."
Islam is a virus. It's carriers must be eliminated.
hmmm. Putin is a terrorist, source the New American.
Sounds scary. But sounds familiar. Sounds like the propaganda that was out about Bush being behind 9-11-01.
Bush? Oh yeah. Didn't he make the New American too? Sounds like an agenda to me
http://web.archive.org/web/20031003030411/http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/06-02-2003/vo19no11_aids.htm
Vol. 19, No. 11
June 2, 2003
Table of Contents More on the United Nations
Global AIDS Con Game
by William F. Jasper
President Bush’s new global AIDS initiative will provide a massive infusion of funds to UN affiliates that may be responsible for spreading the AIDS epidemic.
Hundreds of lawmakers, cabinet officials, foreign dignitaries, and news correspondents packed into the East Room of the White House on April 29th. They had come to witness the launch of another global crusade against another momentous crisis. "Time is not on our side," President Bush urgently declared. "So I ask Congress to move forward with [the] speed and seriousness this crisis requires." And the seriousness of the crisis, the president averred, requires an immediate deployment of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars, in an ongoing foreign aid program. What is this crisis? The president explained:
HIV/AIDS is a tragedy for millions of men, women and children, and a threat to stability of entire countries and of regions of our world. Our nations have the ability and, therefore, the duty to confront this grave public health crisis. We are here today to urge both Houses of the United States Congress to pass the emergency plan for AIDS relief, which will dramatically expand our fight against AIDS across this globe.
"Fighting AIDS on a global scale is a massive and complicated undertaking," President Bush proclaimed. "Yet, this cause is rooted in the simplest of moral duties." Thus, the president exhorted Congress to move quickly on his five-year, $15 billion global AIDS initiative.
Once again, George Bush has out-Clintoned Bill Clinton. The Clinton-Gore team (or any other Democrat-controlled White House, for that matter) could not have come close to getting most congressmen behind such an enormous and outrageous pro-abortion, anti-family foreign aid scheme. But with the Bush White House fervently supporting this UN boondoggle and providing cover, congressional Republicans jumped on board the global gravy train, eager to burnish their compassion credentials. On May 1st, 183 Republicans joined 191 Democrats to pass H.R. 1298, the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act, by a vote of 375 to 41. (Forty Republicans and one Democrat — Gene Taylor of Mississippi — stood on principle and voted against this unconstitutional, immoral measure.)
As we write, the Senate version is reportedly heading toward passage, with congressional leaders eager to meet White House demands that the final legislation be ready for the president’s signature by Memorial Day.
Another Leftist Triumph
Yes, the AIDS pandemic is a terrible tragedy. Will this new legislation and the vast rivers of funds it releases provide the relief, cures, and solutions that its champions claim? Unfortunately not. In fact, it is virtually certain that it will fail in these stated objectives — while succeeding fabulously in its real objectives: empowering a vast new UN bureaucracy and advancing the radical population control schemes of the one-world elite. Here is the blunt, unvarnished truth about the Bush AIDS initiative:
• It is the creation of the most extreme-left, pro-abortion forces in Congress (e.g., Senators Teddy Kennedy and Joseph Biden, and Reps. Barbara Lee and Tom Lantos, to name a few), together with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and World Health Organization and World Bank officials.
• It will pour billions of dollars into the personal bank accounts of African dictators, corrupt officials, and regimes allied to terrorist organizations.
• It will pour billions of dollars into the coffers of dramatically expanded UN agencies and NGOs that have accumulated atrocious records for promoting abortion, coercive sterilization, and sex-ed programs encouraging promiscuity and homosexuality.
• It will actually accelerate the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted and infectious diseases by funding "family planning" and "reproductive rights" programs that are already responsible, as recent studies show, for much of the AIDS pandemic in Africa (see sidebar on page 21).
In short, President Bush’s AIDS initiative is a colossal betrayal of the pro-life, pro-family principles he claims to embrace. It is also a betrayal of his most loyal core constituency, far too many of whom continue to believe, against all evidence to the contrary, the president’s empty pro-life rhetoric.
To get some idea of the truly radical scope of the president’s AIDS program, consider the following statement from Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), one of the most extreme pro-abortion, pro-homosexual activists in Congress, on April 2, 2003:
Today’s mark-up is truly historic. This morning we are considering perhaps the most ambitious piece of legislation in this Committee’s long history. The $15 billion authorized in the "United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003" is an enormous sum by any measure. It is five times — I repeat, five times — the amount we considered authorizing for this cause just last year. For those of us who have long called for a real commitment of resources to address the HIV/AIDS crisis, our day has arrived.
The day of the Clintonite radicals has indeed arrived — under a Republican president and a Republican Congress. One month after Rep. Lantos’ jubilant remarks, his militant comrade-at-arms, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), offered a similar, triumphant toast. An official press release, issued by Rep. Lee’s office on May 1st, stated:
"I am pleased that the House has passed this truly historic legislation," said Lee, who has worked many years on both international and domestic HIV/AIDS funding. "This bill gives us the opportunity to care for a significant number of individuals who are suffering from HIV/AIDS and also works toward preventing millions more from being victimized by this deadly disease."
As already mentioned, this "truly historic legislation" will not save millions of lives from the AIDS scourge, the claims of Lee and her cohorts notwithstanding. But it will do much to advance some very subversive agendas. And when it comes to Rep. Lee, one of the most overtly subversive members of Congress, as well as one of the principal architects of H.R. 1298, it is essential to be aware of those agendas.
This is the same Rep. Barbara Lee, recall, who was assistant and understudy to militantly pro-Communist Rep. Ron Dellums. In addition, she has traveled to Grenada to coordinate activities with the Castroite Politburo of that Communist regime; she has been a top official for the past decade of the Communist Party splinter faction known as the Committees of Correspondence; and she co-chairs the radical Progressive Caucus and formerly chaired the extreme-left Congressional Black Caucus.
The same press release issued by Rep. Lee’s office on May 1st stated:
Lee and the bill’s other sponsors defeated a number of amendments that attempted to weaken the bill.... In spite of the victory, Lee expressed disappointment that social conservatives passed an amendment calling for one-third of the bill’s future prevention funding to be specifically designated for abstinence [education] programs, instead of leaving appropriations decisions to be made by experts in the field. "We will fight to remove this provision in the final version of the bill," said Lee. "We negotiated in good faith, only to have the Republicans and the White House push for this amendment. I am very disturbed that they politicized our efforts to address this humanitarian crisis."
Reps. Lee and Lantos are not really all that worried; they know the abstinence amendment was largely cosmetic, intended to give Republicans a phony "victory" they could crow about to placate their pro-life constituents. Even if the abstinence amendment survives in the final bill, there is little likelihood that Congress or the Bush administration (or any future administration) will monitor and enforce its far-flung global programs any more vigorously and efficiently than they do the numerous foreign aid programs that already exist.
When President Bush and his congressional allies began touting their new AIDS hobbyhorse in January, they assured social conservatives that the program would be based on a proven "ABC" approach that stresses behavioral change, with "A" for abstinence, "B" for be faithful, and "C" for using condoms — when appropriate. But it soon became apparent that "Abstinence, Be faithful, and Condoms" would be replaced by "Abortion, Be tolerant, and Condoms galore."
On February 16th, the Los Angeles Times reported: "In a major policy shift, President Bush has decided to allow social service agencies in Africa and the Caribbean to receive U.S. funds under his $15 billion emergency AIDS relief plan even if they promote family planning and provide abortions, White House officials said."
The Times report and other similar signals caused some of the president’s mesmerized pro-life followers to snap out of their dream worlds. The February 2003 Ryan Report of the American Life League (ALL), for instance, reported that Bush’s about-face on the AIDS issue "shocked members of the pro-life community who thought they had a friend in George Bush."
"This is an outrage!" the ALL Ryan Report went on to protest. "Bush’s decision will certainly make Planned Parenthood happy. In fact it came in the midst of Planned Parenthood’s National Condom Week (February 14-21) while Planned Parenthood was asking its supporters to send a condom to Africa in the president’s name via its website. Planned Parenthood’s claim on that website that Bush is anti-condom certainly does not seem to apply to Bush’s AIDS initiative."
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was one of the 41 House members who voted against H.R. 1298 on May 1st. "The supposedly conservative Congress overwhelmingly passed a foreign aid bill that could have come straight from the desk of the most liberal Democrat," Rep. Paul said in a blistering statement issued by his office on May 5th. "The legislation sends $15 billion of your tax dollars to Africa, ostensibly to fight AIDS by distributing condoms, providing sex education, and funding abortion providers."
The Texas physician, who has a solid pro-life voting record, continued:
Sadly, this $15 billion expenditure comes even as Congress is cutting funding for veterans by roughly the same amount. The Treasury is running record deficits, the Pentagon is engaged in enormously expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and veterans’ programs are badly underfunded — yet still Congress is sending billions overseas for yet another dubious and unconstitutional program. This should anger every American who still believes in the true conservative tenets of limited government, fiscal restraint, and private charity instead of social welfare programs.
But most of the pro-life community remain in denial, preferring to believe that the president’s promises of commitment to the unborn mean more than his actions that clearly indicate the opposite intent. The Republican leadership in Congress has aided and abetted the White House in this deception. This includes GOP stars who have built reputations as right-to-life champions.
The lead Judas goat in the AIDS sham has been Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee and the principal sponsor of the Bush AIDS initiative. Chairman Hyde issued a statement for the committee on May 1st, declaring that H.R. 1298 "is an unprecedented bipartisan initiative that will lead the way for increased U.S. engagement and leadership to contain the spread of the pandemic, and ultimately to arrest AIDS as a threat to economic and national security." Echoing the White House, Chairman Hyde’s release stated that "AIDS threatens the political, social and economic stability of the world, a danger that grows with each passing year."
Pratt House Genesis
Again, the Republicans were stealing a page from Team Clinton’s playbook. But the Clinton playbook didn’t really originate in the Clinton White House; it came from the Pratt House, New York headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The genesis and development of what is now the Bush global AIDS program can be traced in dozens of task force reports and round-table discussions sponsored over the past decade by the CFR, as well as articles from the CFR’s journal Foreign Affairs.
Consider, for example, the November/December 2000 Foreign Affairs article entitled "A Foreign Policy for the Global Age," by Clinton National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger. In this piece, Mr. Berger (a CFR member) writes:
Finally, we have made the fight against deadly infectious diseases a national security priority. Some may think this goal stretches the definition of national security, but a problem that kills huge numbers, crosses borders, and threatens to destabilize whole regions is the very definition of a national security threat.... President Clinton made this issue a centerpiece of his last G-8 summit, but this challenge will call for even greater resources and attention in the future.
Team Bush has been more than willing to accommodate the AIDS expansion called for in this "centerpiece" initiated by Team Clinton. Why is this so? Because, party labels aside, the Clinton and Bush administrations, like the administrations preceding them back to the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt, are merely ball carriers for the organized one-worlders, who are most visibly represented at the CFR.
Senator Barry Goldwater described this subversive Pratt House influence in his 1979 book, With No Apologies. "When we change presidents," the senator wrote, "it is understood to mean that the voters are ordering a change in national policy. Since 1945, three different Republicans have occupied the White House for 16 years and four Democrats have held this most powerful post for 17 years." But even though the party labels of the men in the Oval Office during those years flipped back and forth, he noted, the CFR members in our government continued the same destructive policies from one administration to another.
Senator Goldwater observed: "There has been a great turnover in personnel, but no change in policy. Example: During the Nixon years, Henry Kissinger, a council member and Nelson Rockefeller protégé, was in charge of foreign policy. When Jimmy Carter was elected, Kissinger was replaced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, a council member and David Rockefeller protégé."
So it has continued to the present. CFR member Samuel Berger has been replaced in the National Security Adviser slot by Condoleezza Rice (CFR). Likewise, hundreds of other "liberal Democrat" CFR members in the top echelons of the Clinton administration have been replaced by hundreds of "conservative Republican" CFR members in the Bush administration. And that administration is giving full-throttle support to the CFR’s one-world, anti-Christian agenda. Leaders of conservative, pro-life, pro-family, and Christian organizations who refuse to acknowledge this readily apparent fact are actually advancing this same agenda and assisting those destroying our civilization.
for later when I have more time to read....like after I retire in 15 years. ;) You sure have long articles. ;)
1. Newspaper stories from Chechneya are not the basis for NATO's evaluation of Russian military strength. That kind of evaluation is based on a multitude of hard evidence such as satellite recon photos, eyewitness accounts from inside Russia, communications intercepts, etc.
2. Be wary of people who use historical data to promote great predictors of the future. You see this done all the time by people who are selling something, and usually they are distorting and carefully selecting their facts to "fit" history into the predictions somebody made years before.
3. Several other Russian defectors have written a number of highly alarmist books which sell reasonably well to hard line anti-Soviets in the West. They make good money form their writing but many of their predictions and warnings prove to be false.
4. The CFR is not a far left organization. There's another think tank in D.C. that is almost a Soviet front group but its name escapes me.
5. The story I read about the FSB getting caught bombing an apartment building went something like this--a building manager catches an FSB agent leaving the basement where a bomb has been planted. The building manager questions the FSB agent about what he's doing there, then the agent gives him a business card with a phone number that the local police traced back to an FSB office in the Moscow area. Now if this story is true, the FSB hardly looks like the master chess players that this author portrays them to be. They look more like keystone cops. So either this apartment bombing story is a fabrication or the FSB/KGB is not so brilliant after all.
Absolute unmitigated, knee-deep bull$hit!
And, I suppose, Bush was the eeeeevil mastermind behind 911, also.
Boob!
Paranoid nutburger placemarker.
This idiot, like so many others, insists on constructing an illusory coherent historical account, when none such is possible in advance of radically unpredictable events.
ALL reductionist schemes fall to earth in the face of reality. I think that the impulse to believe in them springs from the same root as belief in astrology and other pretend metaphysics - a desire to live in a child-like reality with both present and future guaranteed by ... something. Anything. Pity them.
Chechen terrorists are behing Chechen terrorism.
End of story.
I find all this very interesting.
The Russians just can't get this revolution thing right.
The first revolution was captured by the Bolshavics and that was captured by Stalin. When Gorbachev saw the light and actually began change, the ologarchs took over and stripped all the national assets, depositing the proceeds in Switzerland (and in Gore/Clinton accounts ala marc rich). To counter the oligarchs, a mafia, a criminal confederaton gained the upper hand.
Into all this Putin thrust himself. He has no one to counton except the old line agency. He is in a really tough spot.
Even if he knows what the result should look like he can't get there because there are too many serious obstacles in the way.
There must be death and lots of it before the democratic revolution can progress.
The timing [bashing Russians] is extremely suspicious in light of the islamonazi terror attack in Russia.
Are the islamic apologists coming out of the woodwork to take the focus off the New nazis where it belongs??
And this isn't the only post on FR of late trying to take the focus off Islam.
I've been getting skads of FReepemail about islamic apologists who have become abundant on FR of late. It is a growing problem with the potential to boil over like the last mass exodus did. Some apologists have even started flame wars critical of anyone who dares say anything about islamics.
THIS POST is somewhat MORE SUBTLE...merely as misdirection to remind us that "Russia had it coming to them."
I disagree with such propaganda, especially now.
I suggest we keep the focus on the problem, not the victims before more leave FR for more hospitable pastures in an effort to escape the islamic apologists who claim only to be "moderate republicans." [I doubt it]
Yeah and 200,000 people were killed by the Serbs in Kosovo!!!! Riiiiiiiggggghht! < /sarcasm>
The Chechens may not like their lot in life, but when they made common cause with Al Qaida they set sympathy for their cause back by a century or two and and they are going to pay a very high price. The international wind wasn't blowing that way.