China and Russia have 'stashes' of weapons here in the U.S. today. : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

The worst news comes not from a dead reporter but a living hero. Softwar has obtained an exclusive interview with former GRU Colonel Stanislav Lunev. Col. Lunev is the highest-ranking member of the former Soviet Union intelligence services to defect to America. He is, to this day, surrounded by FBI agents for his protection.

In 1999, I presented the K.S. Wu information to Colonel Lunev for his evaluation. According to Col. Lunev, Russian and Chinese army operatives in the U.S. have created large stockpiles of arms for use in time of war. These communist weapon caches are reportedly hidden all over America. According to Lunev, the Chinese and Russian weapon stockpiles include explosives, nerve gas, anthrax and as many as 120 "suitcase" nuclear bombs!

I have confirmed Colonel Lunev's story with several members of Congress. Red China and Russia have pre-positioned nuclear, chemical and biological weapons on American soil with the intent of destroying our nation. President Clinton and Congress are aware that China and Russia have smuggled nuclear bombs into the United States.

-- Bumble Bee (, March 23, 1999


This is nothing more than right-wing extremist propoganda. If any of this were true, the reporter would have been dead last week, before he could even write the second part of the article. It is indeed sad times when we see "Hard Copy" type propoganda being passed off as legitimate news reporting, and millions of gullible Americans actually believing this garbage.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

Not so, @. Too many dead reporters spoil the soup. Some of it's gotta leak out, some of the time.

-- Bumble Bee (, March 23, 1999.


the problem with this is that the only tracable source is Lunev, and Lunev says a lot of outrageous and totally unprovable stuff. yeah, I saw the bluesky article too, but I have to tell you hat I am entirely unimpressed with the reporters unnamed sources. I have yet to see anything Lunev said proven true and I have yet to see anything Lunev said verified through an independent source.

personally, if I had to guess, I'd say that Lunev is either (more likely) simply telling people whatever they're willing to pay him money to hear, *or* (much less likely) someone who is an agent for party or parties unknown whose goal is to engender open hostility between the US and Russia. The reason I say this is that his purported invasion scenarios are logisticly unsupportable, even with prepositioned supply would appear that he is primarily counting on the military naivete' of his audience to protect him from questions which would be obvious to anyone with military operations planning experience.


-- Arlin H. Adams (, March 23, 1999.

You've got to be kidding. This guy is a bigger liar than Rush Limbaugh, and he wants you to PAY him for the feeding you the lies that you WANT to hear!

He's obviously catering to conservatives and right wing extremists, but what really pisses me off is that he is calling it "news". That should be illegal.

It used to be that to call yourself a news reporter you would have to try to get factual evidence of the truth, or you could not report it.

Here's what Farah (the editor in chief) says: "I decided it was time for a change in how news was reported, edited and delivered."

Yeah, but you left out one part, and that is how you GET the news! I guess some people just don't want to know the truth. They would rather pay this guy to feed them his agenda over the internet, because it fits their personal reality.

This is a classic example of the kind of thing newcomers to the internet need to watch out for. Many people are using the Internet to pose as legitimate news reporters and sell you a bunch of lies.

What a SCAM!!

"Do you have a car, boat or truck you'd like to donate? Or how about a warehouse full of office furniture? WND can now accept a wide-range of donated goods. Think of us as the nation's one-stop donation station."

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

A few years back, at Yeltsin's behest, Alexsander Lebed took an invertory of the suitcase bombs. I have forgotten the exact numbers, but I vaguely remember that 120 bombs were produced yet only 37 were accounted for. This does not mean that the bombs were deployed. Could be just accounting errors and sloppy paperwork - both of which are in abundance in Russia today. Does anyone know any technicals on the suitcase bombs? Are they boosted? What is the yield?

-- No No (, March 23, 1999.


Sorry, I am not attacking you, but this kind of crap pisses me off! You are just another naive internet user falling prey to this kind of mind control exploitation.


-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

Yeah Bumble, if you want the real news, go to Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, or Dan Rather. They don't make stuff up like Joe Farah does!

-- Roger (, March 23, 1999.


No, those guys are liars too. There aren't too many good sources of truthful news these days, so you really need to look for it yourself.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

Don't forget the Washington Post and the New York Times!

-- ! (, March 23, 1999.

CNN is always a good, trustworthy, unbiased source of news too. I think we should proclaim Ted Turner king of the planet. Hanoi Jane could be queen of the universe.

-- Roger (, March 23, 1999.

Washington Post and New York Times - liberal? HAH!! That's funny!

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

In fact, the only media guys you can NEVER trust are those nasty right-wing conservative wackos. WorldNetDaily, NewsMax, Drudge, etc. Those guys just invent stuff out of thin air for all you stupid conservative/religious/fascist types to swallow hook-line-&-sinker. If they don't have something good to say about our god and savior William Jefferson Clinton, I don't read 'em!!!

-- ! (, March 23, 1999.

No hate speech here......

-- pinheadpointeroutter (lovethatpinhead@lovethat liberal, March 23, 1999.

Even a lunatic like Drudge has more integrity than to claim that Clinton invited communists to bring their nukes into our country! Come on, only total idiots would believe that crap. These kinds of accusations are made by the lowest of life forms, like Ken Starr for example.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

Don't you know that it's OK to hate conservatives? They're the group that makes up most of those crazy Y2K-doomsday stories. If Y2K really was a problem, don't you think Dan Rather would have told me by now???

-- ! (, March 23, 1999.

Ken Starr is the Antichrist!!! William Jefferson Clinton is god!!!

-- ! (, March 23, 1999.

Boy are you confused. It is mostly conservatives in the media that are intentionally keeping Y2K so secretive and calling those that prepare for Y2K the wackos.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.


Did you bother checking out the source documents before declaring WorldNetDaily to be fabricating stories? I sort of doubt that you did (as most liberals are loath to actually examine facts).

You can find them at:

-- Roger (, March 23, 1999.

Just keep doing whatever your idols tell you and you'll be just fine. Everything that Rush Limbaugh and Joseph Farah and Ken Starr want you to believe is the absolute truth! (As long as they keep making money)

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

That's just it dipshit, there ARE NO source documents!!!!!

-- @ (@@@.@), March 23, 1999.

Although Rush Limbaugh does have King Willie's number down, he's as big an idiot as you are, @.

-- Roger (, March 24, 1999.

If Rush Limbaugh is an idiot, then you must be too because you sound just like him.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 24, 1999.


You're right, we don't have a letter from the Chinese Premier which says, "We have nukes outside of DC." But there are documents which provide substantial circumstantial evidence that the People's Republic of China are up to no good. But wait, they helped reelect your favorite president, so they can't be all bad, can they???

Wake up MORON!

-- Roger (, March 24, 1999.

Blurry copies of so-called letters are not SOURCE DOCUMENTS asswipe!

Tell me WHO the source is with somne evidence to back it up and something that isn't whipped up in Adobe Photoshop, you DUMBFUCK!!!

-- @ (@@@.@), March 24, 1999.

Thank you for so graciously making my point for me with your last post, @.

Now calm down... Janet Reno is going to get that evil Ken Starr, and all will be right with the world. After all, the VP that created the Internet wouldn't let this country suffer from Y2K, would he??? Take another drink and go back to polishing your "Gore in 00" buttons.

-- Roger (, March 24, 1999.

DO Any OF You idIOTs KNoW HoW STUpiD YoU LOok?????

-- Dieter (, March 24, 1999.

Has anyone ever gotten the impression that CNN is actually somewhat of an Orwellian Big Brother? This feeling started with me during Desert Storm when this major news network, with operatives all over the world, made no effort to get their own facts but simply sat in the same room with all the other news reporters and listened to what the generals told them had happened. Since then, there have been other situations that seem to indicate Turner is too cozy with some/many/all branches of the government, and feeds us what they want us to know/think.

Our government has stopped allowing newsmen into war zones since Viet Nam. Remember Cally and other embarrasing news reports? It seems that if CNN truly wanted to get the story in Iraq, they could have managed to do so. That stuff about it being the most covered war in history, as told to us in a large part by CNN itself, is a lot of crap. There were lots of video of bombs bursting in air and tracer fire but no substance.

Just my opinion.


-- Floyd Baker (, March 24, 1999.

Enough! All of you stop your political wrangling and bone up on history. Read "The Art of War," the oldest military treatise in the world. It was written by the Chinese. It's available on the Web (courtesy the Gutenberg project) at:

Read it. Form your own opinions, and should you choose to post after that, do it with the purpose of this forum in mind. And LOSE the vulgarity!

-- Learn from history (, March 24, 1999.


Here is some hard copy for those who have eyes, most just throw this info away muttering, "religious jerks". The major clue is in the term "hidden ones." But now they, we, USA, Israel are revealed.

(Psa 83:2-5 KJV) "For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:"

-- Hosea (, March 24, 1999.

I feel the same way about CNN, Floyd, and have from about the same time you did.

-- sparks (, March 24, 1999.

Bah Bah WaWa weporting. If the source is not fwom me or our affiwiates, it cannot be twusted.

Wet's dispel some wumors here. The internet is not to be twusted in genewal. However, since we are "Amewica's New's Source", you can access owwa web site for accuwate, up-to-date news that you can use.

Wissen to us, and nobody else. And after conducting a therwough investigative weport, I can honestwy tell you that evewyting is under contwowal. Nothing to worwy about.

-- BahBah Wawa (, March 24, 1999.

SILENCE! We own you all! You are our slaves. Go now, and watch more of our TV. Obey. Sleep.

-- Big Al (The @Federal.Reserve), March 24, 1999.

Nothing like watching a really good spit fight!! However, the original posting was about Russian suitcase bombs that may or may not have been covertly deployed onto American soil. As of yet I have not been able to find much more info on the bombs, but appears that there was a British documentary aired about them. Alleged that the bombs were briefcase size and weighted 30 to 40 kg (seems mighty heavy to me). Also, gave the yield as 1kt. Said that the bombs could be detonated without deblocking codes from Moscow.

-- No No (, March 24, 1999.

Ok....I personally went and listened to Col. Lunev speak. I don't know if the suitcase story is true or not....but I WILL tell you this...before we were allowed entrance to the room where he was going to speak we had to be searched...have our purses searched...and all of our cars were gone over. The FBI was there and there were atleast 4 agents that were around him the entire time that he was speaking. We were told that we were not allowed to photograph him and any cameras would be taken by the FBI...There were FBI walking though the audience while he was there. Anyway...I do beleive that he know something and that the government is protecting him for some reason!!!

-- Mary-n-Tx (, March 24, 1999.

"The FBI was there and there were at least 4 agents that were around him the entire time that he was speaking. We were told that we were not allowed to photograph him and any cameras would be taken by the FBI...There were FBI walking though the audience while he was there."

Two points.

1) How do you know these folks were FBI? In my experience, not everyone tells the truth all the time. Especially when money (aka lecture fees) is involved.

2) If they were FBI, what it makes me think of is a DISinformation project. In which case one should consider who could possibly want to persuade us that we're in mortal danger, and martial law might be good for us?

-- Alias (, March 31, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ