The nuclear dimension of the Balkan War [snip]

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

From: Tom Atlee
Subject: The nuclear dimension of the Balkan War
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 12:45 AM

Dear friends,

I have held off relaying the many excellent items I have received on the Balkan war. The issue is extremely complex and drags scarce attention away from Y2K work. I felt that with so much disagreement among people I respected, I couldn't offer any clarity to all of you on my list. As with most wars, what I see most vividly is the application of force (and money for force) after years of failing to do intelligent bridgebuilding, healing, nurturance of democracy and human-to-human support (and failing to provide money for those long-term social investments). I also see those same failures in dozens of other places, where we will probably see wars in the near future -- unless we change our obsessively short-term, narrow self-interested thinking.

Anyway, I had concluded that Y2K would ultimately generate far more human suffering and social disruption than the Balkan war. Given the little time we have to prepare for Y2K -- and the fact that so many other people are attending to the war -- I believed that those few of us working on Y2K should keep our focus there.

The material below makes me doubt that judgment. It describes the nuclear threat associated with the Balkans. Although I am still planning to keep my focus on Y2K (and the transformational issues associated with it), I am less sure that Y2K will cause more disruption than the Balkan war. I pass this material on so that each of you can make your own judgment. These are indeed difficult times.

I was a peace activist during the sixties and eighties. The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) -- the source of the first article below -- was one of the most respected peace groups around. It was co-led by Harvard cardiologist Dr. Bernard Lown and Gorbachev's cardiologist Dr. Evgenie Chazov (who had also ministered to Gorbachev's two predecessors). Its work had a profound influence on Gorbachev, and thus on the end of the Cold War. It won the Nobel Peace Prize. It is a very trustworthy source.

I don't know the person who wrote the second article, but in light of the first one, it provides interesting complementary information. The picture painted by these two reports is great cause for concern. The new Russian hatred and fear of Americans, caused by the bombings of Serbia, was confirmed to me last night by a friend who has just returned from a year there.

It is time to use our voices.

Coheartedly,

Tom

_ _ _ _ _

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 12:26:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wendy Tanowitz
Subject: IPPNW statement--please read and circulate!

US-Russian relations at 'most dangerous juncture'
"BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS"
by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford
Times-Colonist 13 MAY 99 page A15

I am writing with an enormous sense of urgency and dread. I have just been at a seminar in Moscow, followed by one at the Olof Palme Institue in Stockholm. The meetings have convinced me we are on the brink of nuclear war by the unintentional escalation of the war against Yugoslavia.

Only western press and television coverage does not portray the significance of the change in Russian policy regarding nuclear weapons. The media imply that Russian warnings of a looming world war, and their refusal to ratify START II, are the usual political threats to gain concessions from the U.S. and loans from the International Monetary Fund.

This analysis does not reflect the profound change in public opinion expressed even by Moscow members of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. One of our long-term IPPNW doctors, Dr. Davidenko, has changed from advocating nuclear disarmament to advocating nuclear deterrence for Russia.

Our meeting with Aleksander Arbatov, deputy chairman of the Defence Committee of the Russian State Duma, left us deeply concerned. Arbatov stated that U.S.-Russian relations, in the wake of NATO's bombing campaign in Yugoslavia, are at the "worst, most acute, most dangerous juncture since the U.S.-Soviet Berlin and Cuban missile crises."

He states that START II is dead, co-operation with NATO is frozen, co-operation on missile defence is out of the question, and Moscow's willingness to co-operate on non-proliferation issues is at an all-time low. Moreover, anti-U.S. sentiment in Russia is real, deep and more wide-spread than ever, and the slogan describing NATO action -"today Serbia, tomorrow Russia," is "deeply planted in Russian's minds." Arbatov was bitter about 10 years of wasted opportunities on both sides, with disarmament talks completely stalled even before this crisis.

Scientist, politicians, doctors and generals all told us the same thing - that NATO bombings of Serbia have set back disarmament 20 years. Some said that India and Pakistan are safe now they have nuclear weapons and that other states like North Korea will step up their nuclear weapons programs. Officials from Minatom, the Russian atomic energy agency, have indicated their great concern about some 22 nuclear reactors in the region of conflict. A bomb hitting a reactor by accident would cause a catastrophe worse than Chernobyl..

Government spokesmen told us repeatedly that Russia will not allow the bombings to continue for another month, and that because their conventional forces are in tatters, Russia must rely on its nuclear weapons. I must ask, "if these are idle threats, what distinguishes them from real threats?" The credibility of the people we spoke with has convinced me that the threats are serious.

Opinion is divided in most countries, even in peace organizations, about whether the NATO bombings were a humanitarian effort to stop a genocide or an act of aggression by NATO, but their impact on nuclear weapons policy is an extremely serious development. Most worrisome to us was the consistency of the statements from speakers at the Moscow seminar and those we met later in ministries of foreign affairs and health.

The single exception was Dr. Evgenie Chazov. He said we must renew our efforts for nuclear disarmament in this very dangerous situation. Dr. Chazov said we are back where we were in 1981 when he and American cardiologist Dr. Bernard Lown founded IPPNW, but our work will be more difficult now.

The Russian speakers deplored ethnic cleansing and did not support Milosovic, but Dr. Serguei Kapitsa, a scientist famous for his weekly television show, stated that Russians feel a sense of betrayal by the West and a profound loss of confidence in treaties and in the United Nations because NATO took this action outside the UN.

Previously confident that Russia was moving toward integration with Europe, they focused their security concerns only on their southern and eastern boundaries. Now they perceive their primary threat from the West.

Officials in Foreign Affairs (Arms Control and Disarmament) told us that Russia has no option but to rely on nuclear weapons for its defence because its conventional forces are inadequate. When I said that if Russia used even a single nuclear weapon the U.S. would respond with hundreds or thousands of missiles, they nodded and said "Yes, it would be suicidal, but how else can we defend ourselves?"

As I left Moscow, I felt the same dread I experienced in the Reagan years, with a similar sense of unreality. While the Russians are comparing this situation to the Cuban missile crisis, journalists in the West tell me that the war is almost over now that negotiations including the Russians are under way. Why are they reassured when Milosevic has not agreed to anything, and the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade has added even greater tensions to this war?

Even if the bombings stop now, the changes in Russia's attitude toward the West, its renewed reliance on nuclear weapons with thousands on high alert, and its loss of confidence in international law leave us vulnerable to catastrophe.

Those of us who live in NATO countries must convince our governments to stop the bombings until negotiations can bring about a settlement. This crisis makes de-alerting nuclear weapons more urgent than ever. To those who say the Russian threat is all rhetoric, I reply that rhetoric is what starts wars.

The global situation is the most urgent crisis of our time. We must mobilize all or networks to stop this bombing before we slide into the final world war.

[Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford is co-president of the Nobel Peace Prize IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War)
- - - - - - -

http://www.kreative.net/carolmoore/4-reasons-nuke-war.html

FOUR REASONS WE MAY SEE NUCLEAR WAR IN 1999

By Carol Moore
carolmoore@kreative.net

"I told NATO, the Americans, the Germans: Don't push us toward military action. Otherwise there will be a European war for sure and possibly world war.'' Russian President Boris Yeltsin, April 6, 1999

"In the event that NATO and America start a ground operation in Yugoslavia, they will face a second Vietnam, I do not want to forecast what is going to start then. I cannot rule out a third world war.'' Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, April 17, 1999

"If NATO goes from air force to ground force it will be a world catastrophe. (Russia) has never felt such anti-Western, anti-European feelings." First Deputy Russian Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais, April 25, 1999.

"You have to understand that if we want to cause you a problem over this, we could. Someone, we don't know who, could send up a missile from a ship or a submarine and detonate a nuclear weapon high over the United States. The EMP (electromagenetic pulse that destroys electronic and computer equipment) would take away all your capability." Vladimir Lukin, Chairman of the Russian State Duma Foreign Policy Committee, late April, 1999 [NOTE: This quote was sourced by Carol Moore in another email as coming from Representative Kurt Weldon (R-PA) who led an early May delegation of U.S. congressional representatives to meet with members of the Russian State Duma to discuss ways to end the US-NATO bombings. According to Moore, Weldon relayed this Lukin statement in a Q&A response after his luncheon speech at the May 18th Cato Institute conference on "NATO's Balkan War" which Moore attended.]

"Just let Clinton, a little bit, accidentally, send a missile. We will answer immediately. Such impudence! To unleash a war on a sovereign state. Without Security Council. Without United Nations. It could only be possible in a time of barbarism." Boris Yeltsin, May 7, 1999

Despite these explicit threats from top Russian officials, the United States and NATO is considering putting ground troops into Yugoslavia. Can nuclear war be far behind? Below are four reasons besides the threats, which some dismiss as bluster, that US-NATO aggression towards Yugoslavia may result in the deaths of two or three billion people worldwide--as well as, if there is any justice, the dissolution of the United States and Russian governments.

U.S./NATO LEADER "WAGS THE DOG"

During 1998 President Clinton threatened or ordered bombing attacks on Iraq, Sudan and Afghanistan that coincided with initial allegations of adultery, his admission of adultery, the House of Representatives' vote on impeachment and the televising of Juanita Broaddrick's credible allegation that Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton raped her in 1978. Although Clinton escaped impeachment, he continues to face jeopardy: leaked FBI files that he had raped three other women and assaulted a number of others; reporters hounding these women to speak out; federal investigators interrogating former Clinton business partners and Chinese government-linked campaign contributors; a forthcoming Congressional report on Clinton's laxity in stopping Chinese government spying at U.S. weapons facilities; reports that Clinton allowed China to legally import nuclear weapons manufacture equipment.

Clinton doubtless saw a double benefit in warring against Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic-he could distract the press and public from his scandals and create the historical legacy of a great leader in wartime. Despite military and CIA warnings that bombing Serbia would drive Serbs to expel hundreds of thousands of Albanians from Kosovo and kill thousands more, Clinton ordered the bombing. Serbia responded as predicted. Yet most Clinton news stories now focus on his role as military leader of the humanitarian effort to help Kosovo's Albanians. Clinton's wagging the dog has destabilized the area and enraged Russia, which still has 6000 plus nuclear weapons, mostly pointed at the U.S. Wars have a habit of escalating faster than their participants planned or anticipated. Clinton's habit of wagging the dog could escalate to worldwide nuclear war within a few short weeks.

RUSSIAN ECONOMIC, POLITICAL AND MILITARY PROBLEMS

The Russian economy is a shambles, dominated by a few politically-adroit bankers and a huge class of criminals who plague honest businesses; government, businesses and individuals rely heavily on bartering goods and services. Government services regularly fail to pay employees, pensioners, military officers and conscripts-even those who control its nuclear weapons. Russia's conventional forces and weapons are deteriorating and its armies are poor and hungry; only its massive arsenal of 6000 plus nuclear weapons poised for delivery gives it military credibility. (The U.S. has over 8000 nuclear weapons.)

The Russian people have been infuriated by NATO attacks on their longtime friend and ally Yugoslavia. Thousands have demonstrated in the streets; one group attempted to launch a grenade attack against the American embassy. Russia is promising humanitarian aid to Serbia and sending a spy ship to the Adriatic ocean off Albania. Russians are volunteering to fight on the Serbs' side. Rumors that Russia will send Serbia weapons abound. Russian Premier Boris Yeltsin has threatened to re-target nuclear weapons on Europe, brought out plans for battlefield nuclear weapons and repeatedly warned of the possibility of world war. Russian, China, India and other nations are discussing banding together against the U.S. and NATO in new security alliances.

Authoritarian and ultra-nationalist leaders, both communist and fascist, promise Russians that if elected in the year 2000 they will right the economy and punish NATO and U.S. aggressors. This forces Russia's current leaders to take a strong stand.

U.S. AND RUSSIAN NEAR-ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WARS

The U.S. and Russia both have a nuclear policy of "launch on warning." This means that less than 15 minutes after detecting a possible missile attack, their militaries must launch all 14000 nuclear weapons or possibly loose them to a first strike by the other side. U.S. leaders have less than 15 minutes to decide if satellites and warning systems are detecting a real attack or merely detecting an innocent phenomena, including a minor glitch in one of hundreds of computers or thousands of software programs. As we shall see, Russian leaders have even less time. (China has nuclear weapons but does not have launch on warning.)

In the last 30 years there have been several incidents which would have led to nuclear war had not clear thinking human beings decided the warning systems were in error. In 1979 a nuclear war simulation tape in a NORAD computer was interpreted to be a real nuclear attack and for 6 minutes emergency preparations for nuclear retaliation were made until the error was discovered. In 1980 a flawed 64-cent chip in telephone switching hardware at NORAD started sending alarming messages to U.S. command centers that a nuclear attack was under way. Defense Department memoranda and a General Accounting Office report have described numerous data, equipment, and software errors in missile warning systems over the last two decades.

In 1983, a Russian satellite interpreted sun glare off clouds as a U.S. nuclear attack and only a lower officer's decision the U.S. had no reason to attack prevented him from reporting such an attack. In January, 1995, Russian President Yeltsin was alerted after radar detected an unexpected missile launch and was close to a decision to launch when the missile went out to sea. It was discovered military leaders had failed to pass on Norway's alert that it would be launching a scientific satellite that day.

Today Russia has only three operational satellites and an outdated ground-based radar system which together fail to cover all possible missile entry routes from land and sea. This makes the Russian military and leaders particularly paranoid and gives them as little as 5 minutes to decide if they are under nuclear attack and launch missiles. Any international situation which makes the Russians or U.S. nervous makes it more likely that the next missile warning error will send 14000 nuclear missiles aloft.

Y2K INCREASES CHANCE OF ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR

On January 1, 2000 a large portion of Russian satellites and tracking devices may go down for days, weeks or months because of Year 2000-related computer problems; so may their already shaky command and control and communications systems. Those of the U.S. also may be compromised to a lesser extent. Both sides probably will experience a number of false warnings of nuclear attacks. Recognizing this problem, Russia and the U.S. were working on a missile-warning plan that would reassure both sides that an attack was not underway. However, after the bombing of Serbia, angry Russians vowed not to cooperate with the U.S. Without such cooperation, unsure of how their computers will function after January 1st, and watching NATO and American troops fighting Serbs and Russians in Kosovo, both sides' militaries could be tempted to pursue a first strike against the other's military targets before January 1-a Y2K "use it or lose it" strategy. Even if negotiations end the war in Yugoslavia, we could have an accidental nuclear war unless all nuclear weapons are de-alerted and the launch on warning strategy is abandoned.

There may not be much time left to prevent WWIII!! Protest to Survive!!

-- Critt Jarvis (middleground@critt.com), May 23, 1999

Answers

Critt,
Thank you for this - awareness of the nuclear angle here is non- existant in the American and British populations.
WE are the bad guys here. Clinton and Blair are prodding the bear with a stick whilst swiping at the panda too (and several other embassy near misses). we even have the Turks now helping us bomb the smithereens out of a sovereign country - without Parliament or Congress giving the OK. Unreal. The Turks could quite easily tip the Russians over the edge...
They are both, Clinton and Blair, TOTALLY out of control.
The whole situation is absolutely incredible. If you wrote this scenario in an op-ed piece a year ago no one would have believed you.
We have several crises looming at the same time here...
Y2K... World Infrastructure Collapse
The Stock Market/Fiat Money Collapse...
WW III - take your pick from Yugoslavia, Iraq, Taiwan, Korea, Turkey, Israel - the list goes on. Just how far can Clinton and Blair do the splits???
Now the gruesome twosome are NOT stupid - one can only conclude that this is part of a planned agenda... NOBODY could be so stupid, could they???
Flame away.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 23, 1999.

"The U.S. and Russia both have a nuclear policy of "launch on warning." This means that less than 15 minutes after detecting a possible missile attack, their militaries must launch all 14000 nuclear weapons or possibly loose them to a first strike by the other side. U.S. leaders have less than 15 minutes to decide if satellites and warning systems are detecting a real attack or merely detecting an innocent phenomena, including a minor glitch in one of hundreds of computers or thousands of software programs. As we shall see, Russian leaders have even less time. (China has nuclear weapons but does not have launch on warning.)"
It is my understanding that Clinton signed-off on a policy of not launching US ICBM's until the US physically absorbs a first strike.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 23, 1999.

You are absolutely correct, Andy. The missiles in American silos aren't even "spun up" - it would take at least 30 minutes to get the ready for launch. The other two legs of the old "nuclear triad - the airborne bombers and submarines - are not of much use, either. The bombers are no longer on 24 hour patrol, and the launch codes for the subs were withdrawn from the sub commanders by Clinton back in 1993.
The U.S. won't be doing much in the way of retaliation is the Russians decide to hit us first. My opinion is that Clinton (a marxist) has knowingly put us into this situation, following the edicts of his One-World handlers, to effect either the destruction or surrender of the U.S. Suddenly all that time he spent in the Soviet Union makes a lot of sense.

-- klm (klm@...), May 23, 1999.

All the information I've read has said that we do in fact maintain a launch-on-warning policy. If anyone has a source for contrary information I would like to see it.
Along these same lines, though...the other day I was looking at Caspar Weinberger's book The Next War, written in 1998. He said that all our nuclear warheads depend on tritium, a radioactive isotope with a half-life of twelve years. Clinton cancelled our tritium production program in 1993. If my figuring is correct that means at this point we've lost a third of the tritium stockpile we had in '93. I'm sure we had extra, of course...

-- Shimrod (shimrod@lycosmail.com), May 23, 1999.

Shimrod,
my information comes direct from Senator Inhofe, I posted a thread on it recently, he's the guy who's propellor fell off while he was flying back home from DC...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 23, 1999.

Critt,
If your source of information is as reliable as their web page (currently kaput) then I'm sorry to say that these articles appear to me to be just more opinionated hogwash, probably coming from the right.
Shimrod,
FYI:
"Bell pointed out that while the United States has always had the "technical capability" to implement a policy of launch on warning, it has chosen not to do so. "Our policy is to confirm that we are under nuclear attack with actual detonations before retaliating," he said."
LINK
You are correct in that we have the ability to implement a LOW policy, but we are not currently operating on that status.

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

Or at least that is what we would like the Russians to believe ...

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

Thanks. I liked this bit: "The notion that the United States still had to be prepared to fight and win a protracted nuclear war today seemed out of touch with reality given the fact that it has been six years since the collapse of the Soviet Union." Never mind that Russia still has all the nukes.
I generally prefer linking to posting fulltexts but I couldn't find the link...I saved the following article from WorldNetDaily a few days ago--I think it's the most frightening article I've ever read:
Is a military offensive being contemplated?
(c)1999 WorldNetDaily.com
"Only the offensive leads to the attainment of victory over the enemy," wrote Col. Sidorenko, a Soviet military strategist in the 1970s. "As a type of combat, the offensive has incontestable advantages over the defense."
Why is the offensive so incontestably superior? Sidorenko explained, "The attacker has broad capabilities for launching surprise strikes, for the rapid exploitation of the results of nuclear attacks. ..."
On Dec. 15, in a Washington Times op-ed piece, J. Michael Waller broke a mainstream media taboo. He noted that Russia's new hard-line leaders had been "spending their time and money preparing for ... nuclear war against the United States and its allies."
Waller's statement, of course, is correct. As crazy as it sounds, the Russians have been preparing for a Third World War, even as Russia's leaders have warned that such a war may be imminent. In recent years, the Russians have built huge underground shelters, bunkers, and nuclear-proof cities. Under Yamantau Mountain in the Urals, the Russians have built an underground city the size of metropolitan Washington. But that is not all the Russians have done. According to Bill Lee, a former official with the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Russians have 10,000 to 12,000 ABMs defending their country. These ABMs have been deceptively described to the outside world as Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs), but as Lee told me in Washington last February, many of these so-called SAMs can carry one-megaton warheads far above the earth's atmosphere. Lee also explained how a special type of nuclear warhead, which puts out x-ray radiation, could be used in these "SAMs" to kill American nuclear warheads as they travel towards Russia, along flight-paths outside the earth's atmosphere. Inside the earth's atmosphere, explained Lee, "the Russians would use interceptor missiles with neutron bombs. The peculiar characteristics of this warhead give it a better kill radius against warhead electronics."
Another peculiar move in recent months, the Russians have been upgrading 180 MiG-29s to what they call the MiG-29 SMT. The upgrade involves the addition of a fuel tank and in-flight refueling capabilities that would give the MiG-29 intercontinental range. Why the Russian Federation would need a jet fighter that could fly to Chicago is something curious. If you put this together with the stockpiling of strategic metals, food, and fuel, a more ominous picture begins to unfold.
Since the NATO bombing began against Yugoslavia, Russian war preparations have accelerated. Over 80,000 Russians have volunteered to fight the West. Last month, the Russian Defense Ministry called up a draft of 170,000 recruits. Russia also called up a large number of naval and marine reserves, which have been used to man Russia's Black Sea Fleet.
In terms of naval deployments, the Russians have mobilized their Northern, Pacific, Baltic and Black Sea fleets for unprecedented training exercises, which have been held almost continuously since 27 March. These exercises have involved marine amphibious landings, missile launches, and mock air-strikes.
But Russia is not alone in preparing for war. China, too, has been engaged in a serious buildup of forces opposite Taiwan. There is also China's invasion of the Spratly Islands, which are located more than 800 miles from China yet 140 miles from the Philippines. In January, Manila was alarmed to discover that the People's Liberation Army was erecting gun and anti- aircraft emplacements on Mischief Reef. The Chinese ambassador to the Philippines, Guan Dengming, insisted that China was merely constructing "shelters for fishermen." But a leading Philippine official countered this, saying, "We strongly believe a fortress is being built. ..." Philippine Defense Secretary Orlando Mercado stated that concrete buildings in the Spratlys "are beginning to look more like military structures rather than the so-called fisherman's refuge the Chinese claimed it to be." Mercado further accused China of bullying the Philippines, referring to recent Chinese moves as a "a creeping invasion."
As it happens, Taiwan's lifeline runs near to the Spratlys. On Jan.12 of this year, Taiwan President Lee, taking note of Beijing's obvious attempts to encircle his small island country, called on his fellow citizens "to raise their vigilance against the military threat from China." Four days earlier, on Jan. 8, Chinese President Jiang Zemin laid out the mission of the People's Liberation Army in a speech: "We must resolutely safeguard the unity of the motherland and the nation's territorial integrity."
Unity, of course, is the war cry of the Communist Chinese against the Nationalist Chinese on Taiwan. President Jiang also warned that the Chinese People's Liberation Army should prepare itself for two things: nuclear war and internal uprisings. Soon thereafter, in mid January, China conducted bomber and missile exercises in which Chinese forces practiced targeting American troops in the Far East. The Chinese have also announced radical changes in military doctrine. The Chinese Air Force was placed in "offensive mode" in January, and China's army doctrine was altered to one of global war-fighting. Chinese war preparations have also been unmasked, more recently, by the United States Congress. The House select committee's long-awaited report, slated for release this week, describes the emergence of China as a serious military threat, claiming that: 1) China has stolen five of America's most modern nuclear warheads through "pervasive" spying at U.S. nuclear laboratories; 2) China has stolen satellite and missile technology; 3) China has illegally acquired supercomputers, telecommunications equipment, jet engines and sophisticated machine tools.
Meanwhile, in a Senate Appropriations subcommittee on defense, America's top general said last Tuesday that North Korea was continuing to strengthen its military, which is mobilized and poised to attack South Korea. According to General Henry Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, North Korea has deployed most of its one million troops near the South Korean border to prepare for war. "Despite its collapsed economy and struggle to feed its own population," explained Shelton, "the North Korean government continues to pour resources into its military and to pursue a policy of confrontation with South Korea and its neighbors in the region." Shelton further said that the threat from North Korea is serious.
In recent months the North Koreans, who are close allies of Moscow and Beijing, have declared, "The United States will [soon] be reduced to ashes and will no longer exist. ..." North Korean headlines from the first week of 1999 proclaimed that: "U.S. Imperialist Aggressors Will Be Unable to Avoid Annihilating Strikes." Another North Korean newspaper stated that the Americans would be wiped "from this planet for good." In the New Year's message of the North Korean government, the Communists called on their citizens to "love rifles, earnestly learn military affairs and turn the whole country into an impregnable fortress." South Korean President Kim Dae- Jung, fearing the Communist threat, warned his people to be ready for a surprise attack from the North.
While the Far East appears on the brink of war, the Middle East is equally bad. Intelligence International has reported that Saddam Hussein recently sent a memorandum to "senior staff in the party, state, and the army." The memorandum says that war is imminent. It says that "the showdown with the United States is not far away." Further along, Hussein promises a "crucial confrontation that will end in Iraq's favor." Saddam's memo also stated: "Iraq will confront -- with determination, vigor, and a devastating response that will be remembered throughout history -- the latest U.S. attempt to inflict harm on it."
Small countries like Iraq and North Korea could not, by themselves, defeat the United States in any kind of war. However, if Iraq and North Korea are supported by the Russian-Chinese alliance, then we are talking about World War III. In that event, all bets are off. Presently the United States is not prepared for a global war, and is certainly unprepared to fight a nuclear war.
From the statements of Iraqi and North Korean officials, one might get the idea that these small countries know that something is about to happen. The Iraqi and North Korean statements, as quoted above, seem to indicate that weapons of mass destruction will be used against the United States and its allies.
"A massed nuclear strike is a strike inflicted by a large number of nuclear weapons simultaneously," wrote Col. Sidorenko in his book, The Offensive. "Its goal is the destruction of enemy means of nuclear attack, the inflicting of destruction on the main formations of his troops, and disorganization of the rear, economy, and troop control." Is a military offensive against the U.S. being contemplated by Russia, Iraq, North Korea and China?
To this question there is only one right answer. Let's not get it wrong.
J.R. Nyquist is a WorldNetDaily contributing editor and author of 'Origins of the Fourth World War.'

-- Shimrod (shimrod@lycosmail.com), May 23, 1999.

Shimrod (No relation to Nimrod I hope :?)
Here is a link from Skousen's interview on Art Bell 8/10/98. Go to Bells Old link archives for this date and you will other links concerning Clinton's PDD on LOW. ======================================================================
Clinton Issues New Guidelines on U.S. Nuclear Weapons Doctrine Craig Cerniello
THE CLINTON a dministration quietly made a significant change in U.S. strategic nuclear doctrine in November by formally abandoning guidelines issued by the Reagan administration in 1981 that the United States must be prepared to fight and win a protracted nuclear war. The new presidential decision directive (PDD), details of which were first reported in The Washington Post on December 7, operates from the premise that the primary role of nuclear weapons in the post-Cold War era is deterrence. In a December 23 interview, Robert Bell, senior director for defense policy and arms control at the National Security Council, provided additional information about the PDD and clarified some misperceptions in the press with respect to the Clinton administration's policy on "launch on warning" and the use of nuclear weapons against a chemical or biological weapons attack. New Guidelines
Due to its highly classified nature, many specific details about the PDD have not been made public. Nevertheless, Bell confirmed that "We have made an important change in terms of strategic nuclear doctrine in reorienting our presidential guidance away from any sense that you could fight and win a protracted nuclear war to a strategic posture that focuses on deterrence."
The administration made the decision to rewrite the old nuclear guidelines early in 1997. At that time, General John Shalikashvili, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained to President Clinton that the United States could not reduce its nuclear arsenal to the level that was being discussed for START III (2,000 to 2,500 deployed strategic warheads) and carry out the objectives of the 1981 nuclear guidelines. Bell pointed out that this assumed that the goals of the old guidelines could ever have been realized--a skepticism that has been voiced by former Reagan administration officials. Hence, one key factor influencing the administration's decision to rewrite the old guidelines was that they were not compatible with the U.S. objective of achieving further strategic force reductions with the Russians.
Moreover, the administration viewed the 1981 guidelines as an anachronism of the Cold War. The notion that the United States still had to be prepared to fight and win a protracted nuclear war today seemed out of touch with reality given the fact that it has been six years since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In this connection, Bell said the 1981 directive "reads like a document you would expect to have been written at the height of the Cold War, not something that you would want operative today...."
Launch on Warning
Bell said the press had incorrectly indicated that the PDD "still allows" the United States to launch nuclear weapons upon receiving warning of an attack. Bell emphasized that "there is no change in this PDD with respect to U.S. policy on launch on warning and that policy is that we do not, not rely on it." In fact, Bell said "in this PDD we direct our military forces to continue to posture themselves in such a way as to not rely on launch on warning--to be able to absorb a nuclear strike and still have enough force surviving to constitute credible deterrence."
Bell pointed out that while the United States has always had the "technical capability" to implement a policy of launch on warning, it has chosen not to do so. "Our policy is to confirm that we are under nuclear attack with actual detonations before retaliating," he said.
Negative Security Assurances
Bell also dispelled the published report that the PDD expands U.S. nuclear options against a chemical or biological weapons attack. "This PDD reaffirms explicitly, virtually verbatim, the policy of this administration as we stated it the last four or five years, including during the extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT], the negotiation of the CTB [Comprehensive Test Ban] and the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention," he said.
Specifically, the PDD reaffirms the 1995 statement on negative security assurances issued by Secretary of State Warren Christopher on behalf of President Clinton at the time of the indefinite extension of the NPT. This statement reiterated in a slightly more restrictive form the 1978 statement on the non-use of nuclear weapons issued by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance on behalf of President Carter.
In this context, Bell explained that it is U.S. policy not to use nuclear weapons first against any state except in three cases. First, "if a state that we are engaged in conflict with is a nuclear-capable state, we do not necessarily intend to wait until that state uses nuclear weapons first--we reserve the right to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict whether its CW [chemical weapons], BW [biological weapons] or for that matter conventional [weapons]," he said. Under the second scenario, Bell said the United States reserves the right to use nuclear weapons first "if a state is not a state in good standing under the Non-Proliferation Treaty or an equivalent international convention." Finally, he said if a state attacks the United States, its allies or its forces "in alliance" with a nuclear-capable state, then the United States reserves the right to use nuclear weapons first, even if that state is not a nuclear-capable state and is in good standing under the NPT. Because these three exceptions have existed for some time, Bell said "there is no policy change whatsoever in this PDD with respect to fundamental U.S. position on no first use of nuclear weapons."

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), May 23, 1999.

Thanks for the WND article, Shimrod, here's the link:
WND Nyquist Article - Is A Military Offensive Being Contemplated?

-- klm (klm@nwhre.not), May 23, 1999.

When I said that if Russia used even a single nuclear weapon the U.S. would respond with hundreds or thousands of missiles, they nodded and said "Yes, it would be suicidal, but how else can we defend ourselves?"
I recall an old story from the Middle East ---
A frog and a scorpion are on the river bank. The scorpion asks the frog to give him a ride to the other side of the river. The frog says, "Do I look crazy? You might sting me halfway across!" The scorpion replies, "Do I look crazy? If I did that, we'd both die." The frog figures this is reasonable, and agrees. The scorpion climbs up on the frog's back, and they start across. In the middle of the river, the scorpion stings the frog.
In his dying agony, the frog asks, "How could you do this?"
The scorpion, himself drowning, says, "This is the Middle East."
If Russia's decision makers were as insane as that, WW3 would have started twenty years ago. Have they gone insane since 1989?
Don't ask the CIA. They don't know jack.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), May 23, 1999.

Hey - you guys are missing all the important stuff! On CNN right now, there're talking about a massive recall of TV carts!

-- a (a@a.a), May 23, 1999.

INCOMING!!!!!! Heads up folks. Facts, the clintons are going on vacation next weekend. The Cox report will be released this week and the senate is screaming for blood. Clintons administration is about to be gutted. Boris Yeltsin is also going on vacation next week. He has just replaced Primakov and most of his cabinet, enough of them to form a second wartime government. Next weekend is Memorial day weekend. Three days. Plenty good cover for your local Trilateralist and CFR members to make themselves scarce from Washington and New York City. The Bildenbergers have just completed their little take over the world session and are conveniently out of pocket. I think there is an excellent chance we may see a major american city, or a bunch of them, go up in mushroom clouds next weekend. Or a major terrorist attack on the Indy 500. Keep your eyes peeled and be ready to run like hell.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

Thanks Nikoli, this is the sort of information that I want to know - who is doing what, when. You can bet if anything is going to go down the Clintons and their cronies will be nowhere to be seen...
My bet is if any city gets it it will be Washington, nuke or bio. However if DC gets nuked, why stop there?
Internationally, my bet is Rome followed by Jerusalem, nuke or bio.
I'm getting indigestion now :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 24, 1999.

Andy, I got a really bad juju going on this one. I think we just may see the mother of all wag the dogs next weekend. I can't recall a holiday weekend in the past where Yeltsin, Clinton, and the bildenbergers were all out of pocket at the same time. This is like a lunar eclipse. Very rare event. I had been thinking nothing would happen till after the gps rollover, but it looks like the release of the Cox report is going to force them to accelerate their timetable and gamble a little. They can't risk their dream team being dragged out and hung when the truth comes out over the next month.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

Nikoli, now that I know what you know I couldn't agree more. And I just started a damn new job right next to NORAD in Colorado. And I'm working that weekend so no trips to Pikes Peak! I AM a fatalist - if it's my time, so be it. Let's hope sanity prevails.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 24, 1999.

Nik, Should I cancel my Barbque for this Sunday or just not worry about buying charcoal?
====Representative Kurt Weldon, R-PA, who recently met Russian State Duma members, has publicly expressed concerns that nuclear war may occur due to "the instabilities this war has caused." In Weldon's presence, the chairman of the Russian State Duma Foreign Policy Committee, Vladimir Lukin, openly threatened America with an EMP attack that would wipe out most computers and electronics in North America, crippling the USA.
The Russian Federation possesses nuclear bombs of high yield, specifically engineered to create a strong Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP). If such a bomb were detonated in outer space, far above North America, it would knock out the continental power grid and fry most all electronics from New York to Los Angeles.
Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, co-president of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, wrote a piece in the May 13 edition of Victoria Times. With a sense of "urgency and dread," Dr. Ashford related her experiences at a seminar in Moscow. The encounter convinced her that we are on the brink of nuclear war. The western media, she wrote, "does not portray the significance of the change in Russian policy regarding nuclear weapons."
Dr. Ashford found that Russia's anti-NATO sentiment is "real, deep and more wide-spread than ever." She further reported that Russian scientists, doctors, and military officers were dismayed at the NATO bombings, and frustrated by America's disregard for Russia's position. Russian officials told Dr. Ashford that Russia will not allow the bombings to continue another month.
President Clinton's assertion that NATO is united may not be true. His belief in victory may be an illusion. But the most dangerous illusion of all, is the illusion that continued bombing will prevent a widened war. How, indeed, does a two-month long provocation of Russia and then China prevent a widened war?
If President Clinton believes what he wrote in Sunday's New York Times, perhaps he is irrational.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ==================================================================

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), May 24, 1999.

Would someone mind detailing a list of the so called Bilderbergers (sic) who are suposedly "out of pocket" or "out of sight" for the weekend??
a friend of Ufonious T Whale

-- My Friend (UFO@T.Whale), May 24, 1999.

Big meeting in Portugal?

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 24, 1999.

Impetus to finish essential preps. One week! And then it's June, just one month before that infamous "7th month of 1999." Time do fly, fly away. Critt, Nik, Andy, y'all, we did not sleep last night after scanning this thread!
Would you like Fry with your summer?
xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), May 24, 1999.

This alert is not meant to start a panic. It is like a Tornado watch. What it means is that all the nescesary factors for a horrendous event are in place. I have felt that the Russians would wait until after the gps rollover to commit to a course of action, even though clinton and NATO have been provoking them to act sooner. However the NWO handlers of Clintons' dream team may percieve that fallout from the Cox report will result in the removal from office of key players, rendering the results of their plan unpredictable. This scenario could lead to an acceleration of the timetable for either implementing martial law, or instigating full blown nuclear war between the United States and the Russian-Chinese alliance. It is entirely possible that constitutionally loyal sections of the military may act to remove the current administration from power before August if the congress once again shirks its responsibility. It should be obvious to everyone by now that Clinton has purposely set this country up to be destroyed in a Nuclear attack through his deterrence policies, and I feel that in the origional scenario this was to be plan B, if martial law failed to disarm the American public.
The United States military and the American public must be destroyed or disarmed before the NWO can complete its agenda of One World government, and the communist powers must also be brought to their knees. The simplest way to do this is to play the Americans off against the communist, letting us destroy each other, and opening the door for the United Nations to consolidate the remaining population of the earth into a single government following the chaos of the war and Y2K induced worldwide economic collapse. There is more than one game going on here, and events are unfolding with blinding speed. If you are focused only on Y2K you are missing the big picture. The name of the game for the next six months is situational awareness. It is almost a dead certainty that we will suffer major attacks against population centers by either suedo terrorist or the communist powers before Jan. 1. The warning signs will be subtle to nearly nonexistent, so pay close attention to what is going on and be ready to react instantly.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

Nik, I have been searching for answers to the GPS rollover problem and there does seem to be problems. There is no one certifying that GPS is y2k ready. No one has said anything about whether GPS has embedded chips. See attached. The military has stated that users of GPS have to purchase new receivers. It is becoming clearer to me that Russia's military is GPS dependent. If there is to be an attack then I am assuming it will be before Aug. 22nd.
In regards to your U.N. scenario I have to agree with Nyquist who states that the Communists have their own agenda for world dominion. Russia will never go along with the U.N. plan for one world.
If Russia attacks the U.S., the UN will disintegrate in my opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- F. Snyder Gokey posts this disturbing letter.
* * * * * * * * * * *
As you may recall, for about a year I have been seeking confirmation that there actually has been an assessment of the embedded systems in the GPS satellites. Since the GPS timing synchronization signal is used in telecoms, utilities, and banking it seems to me of paramount importance that these industries know if there is a GPS risk so they can plan for it in their contingency planning. (Never mind that the ground systems software upgrade is not scheduled to start testing until September.)
I have been skeptical of the early claim that "there are no Y2k problems in satellites" because I did not understand how an assessment could have been performed that early. I believe I have found the source of that information and I believe it indicates that no assessment was done.
In this September 1997 Air Force newspaper is the statement:
"The satellites that form the orbiting GPS constellation are compliant to Y2K operational requirements.
Boeing North America, formerly Rockwell International, analyzed Block II and IIA satellites. Lockheed Martin Federal Systems designed the IIR satellites to be Y2K compliant. BNA is designing the Block IIF to be Y2K as well. The EOW rollover does not affect the satellites.
The only Y2K problems in the Space Segment are with a few sections of ground support equipment."
A link is provided at the bottom of the article to the military's 1999 briefing on the Y2k status of GPS satellites. http://www.laafb.af.mil/SMC/CZ/homepage/y2000 (Go to downloads.) On slide 13 of the PowerPoint presentation you will note that the middle paragraph of this article is quoted almost verbatim. This is the only "source" information I have found anywhere that talks about Y2k compliance of GPS satellites.
The problem is the areas a difference between "being designed to be Y2k compliant" in 1980-1990 and having made an assessment of the embedded chips in the satellites made in 1997. Many programmers did use four-digit years in their programming in 1980-1990. That has nothing to do with what embedded chips were used in the rest of the vehicle at that time to control the vehicles engine and other operations. These things were designed before an embedded chip/embedded system problem was recognized. It seems unlikely that the designers designed every chip in the vehicle as well as the vehicle itself (and then didn't use these new "compliant" chips in the rest of their equipment). More likely, they used the same chips they were putting into other military equipment, which equipment it is now knowledged needs to assessed.
It is about time we quit "assuming" that there has been an assessment of embedded chips in the GPS satellites, and start pushing for some evidence. A potential problem with GPS is no military secret. The Government is already admitted the ground system is not compliant and will be late, at best, in getting so. The consequences to our country of telecoms, utilities and banking failing to compare contingency plans for the loss of the GPS synchronization signal would, in all likelihood, be far more complete than any military risk we might face.
This is a sin qua non. ("Without it, nothing") Lets all do everything we can to either establish there has been or has not been an assessment of the embedded systems in the GPS satellites. If there has not been, that's all suggest that a fundamental element of contingency planning be the reestablishment of land lines for synchronization of telecommunications, power, and banking.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), May 24, 1999.

Y'all might find this partial "guest list" interesting. Even the Pope is invited. Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 10:50 AM Subject: Clinton, Pope to attend 1999 Bilderberg meeting
>-------------------- >To: ignition-point@admin.listbox.com >Subject: IP: Clinton, Pope to attend 1999 Bilderberg meeting >From: Dan S >Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:57:42 -0400 > >CLINTON, POPE TO ATTEND BILDERBERG '99 > >U.S. President Bill Clinton and the aging Pope John Paul II are found on >a "Partial Guest List" of individuals expected to attend the 1999 >Bilderberg meeting that will be taking place in Portugal June 3rd - June >6th. The meeting is expected to include a globilization summit wherein >nations that cling to their sovereign identities will be denounced by >its leadership. In other words, One World Govt or the Third Way. These >are the powerful few who seek to, or actually do, control the destiny of the >World and its nations. Search on "Bilderberg". > >BILDERBERG '99:
Partial Guest List >__________ > >Ackerman, Duane - CEO Bell South >Ahern, Bertie - Prime Minister of Ireland >Alberthal, Les - CEO of Electronic Data Systems (EDS) >Albright, Madeleine - US Secretary of State >Al Saud, Waleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz - Saudi Prince >Amichai, Yehuda - Israeli poet >Annan, Kofi - UN Secretary General >Arafat, Yasser - Chairman Palestinian Authority >Armstrong, Michael - CEO of AT&T Corrporation >Arison, Ted - Israeli Financier >Assad, Hafez - President of Syria >Aznar, Jose Maria - President of Spain >Belluzzo, Richard - CEO - Silicon Graphics-SGI >Berkshire Hathaway - Warren Buffet >Bolkiah, Hassanal - The Sultan of Brunei >Byers, Brook - Partner KPCB >Beyster, J. R. - Founder and CEO of SAIC >Bialkin, Ken - Skadden Arps >bin-Mohamad, Mahathir - PM of Malaysia >Blair, Tony - Prime Minister of UK >Bondevik, Kjell Magne - Prime Minister of Norway >Bonsignore, Michael - CEO Honeywell >Braverman, Avishai - President of Ben-Gurion University >Bronfman, Charles - Canadian businessman >Buffet, Warren, CEO Berkshire Hathaway >Cardoso, Fernando Henrique - President of Brazil >Case, Daniel - Chairman & CEO of H & Q >Case, Stephen - CEO of America On-Line-AOL >Caufield, Frank - AOL Board & Partner KPCB >Cayne, James - CEO of Bear Stearn >Chalsty, John - CEO of DLJ >Chambers, John - CEO of Cisco Systems >Chirac, Jacques - President of Franc >Chr=E9tien, Jean - Prime Minister of Canada >Clinton, Bill - President of the United States >Cohen, Abby - Market Strategist, Goldman Sachs >Corzine, Jon - CEO of Goldman Sachs >Coulter, David - Former CEO of Bank of America >Cresson Edith - EC Commissioner >Daschle, Thomas - Senator, Minority Leader, US Senate >DeGier, Hans - CEO of Warburg Dillon Read >Dehaene, Jean-Luc - Prime Minister of Belgium >Dell, Michael - Dell Computers >Denham, Bob - Salomon Smith Barney >Dinstein, Yoram - President of Tel Aviv University-TAU >Disney, Roy - Vice Chairman & Nephew - Walt Disney >Ebtekar, Massoomeh - Vice President of Iran >Eisenberg, Erwin - Heir to Eisenberg Group >Ellison, Larry - CEO of Oracle >Engibous, Tom - Texas Instruments-TI >Esrey, Bill - CEO of Sprint >Estrada, Joseph - President of the Phillipines >Fahd, King - Leader of Saudi Arabia >Fan, Rita - Chairwoman Provincial Legislature China >Fisher, Max - Chairman, Republican National Jewish Coalition- NJC >Fisher, Richard - CEO of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter >Fortune 1000 - Group Focus Letter >Frankel, Jacob - Bank of Israel >Friedlander, Yehuda - Rector of Bar Ilan University >Fuld, Fichard - CEO of Lehman Brothers (acquired Blount Intl) >Gates, Bill - CEO of Microsoft >Gerstner, Lou - CEO of IBM >Glavin, Christopher - Motorola - Strategy Focus >Goh Chok Tong - Prime Minister of Singapore >Goldberg, Ed - Merrill Lynch - Strategy Focus >Grafton, Bob - CEO of Arthur Andersen Worldwide >Grasso, Richard - CEO, New York Stock Exchange-NYSE >Greer, Phil - Weiss Peck & Greer >Grove, Andy - Former CEO of Intel >Gujral, I.K. - Former Prime Minister of India >Habibie, B. J. - Indonesia's Prime Minister >Hammerman, Stephen - Vice Chairman Merrill Lynch >Harari, Chaim - President of Weizmann Institute >Hariri, Rafik - Prime Minister of Lebanon >Hashimoto, Ryutaro - Former Prime Minister of Japan >Hastert, Dennis - GOP - Speaker of the US House of Representatives >Hayuth, Yehuda - President of Haifa University >Honeycutt, Van - CEO Computer Sciences Corporation-CSC >Horovitz, Avraham - GM - UMI Israel Chief Scientist >Howard, John - Prime Minister of Australia >Hussein, King - of Jordan and The Crown Prince Hassan (HK: Deceased) >Ichan, Carl - Wall Street Financier >Jackson, Judge Thomas Penfield - US District Court - Washington D. C. >Jiang Zemin - President of China >Jobs, Steven - Apple Computers >Jospin, Lionel - Prime Minister of France >Kangas, Edward - CEO Deloitte, Touche, Tohmatsu - International- DTTI >Kaveh, Moshe - President of Bar Ilan University >Khatami, Mohammed - President of Iran >Kim, Dea.jung - President of South Korea >Kim Young-sam - Former President of South Korea >Kissinger, Kissinger - former US Secretary of State >Kok, Wim - Prime Minister of the Netherlands >Koller, Arnold - President of Switzerland >Komansky, David - CEO of Merrill Lynch >Kohl, Helmut - Former Chancellor of Germany >Lane, Neal - Former Director of the NSF >Laskawy, Phil - CEO of Ernst & Young-EY >Lavie, Arie - Former Chief Scientist - Israel >Lee Kuan-Yew - President of Singapore >Lee Teng-hui - President of Taiwan >Leon, Moshe - Director General, PM's Office Israel >Lerner, Alex - Israeli Scientist >Levin, Gerald - CEO Time Warner, Inc. >Li Peng - Prime Minister of China >Livingston, Robert - GOP Nominee as - US Speaker of the House >Lott, Senator Trent - GOP Senate Majority Leader - US Senate >Magidor, Menachem - President of Hebrew University >Mahathir Mohamad - Malaysian Prime Minister >Mandella, Nelson - President of South Africa >Marron, Donald - CEO of Paine Webber Group - Enterprise Strategy >McGinn Richard - CEO of Lucent- Enterprise Strategy >McNealy, Scott - CEO of Sun Microsystems >Middelhoff, Thomas - CEO Bertelsmann & AOL Director >Mitchell, George - Former GOP Senate Majority Leader >Moore, Nicholas - Chairman of PriceWaterhouse Coopers-PWC L.L.P. >Mubarak, Hosni - President of Egypt >Murdoch, Rupert - Austrialian Media Owner >Narayanan, K.R. - Former President of India >Ne'eman, Yaacov - Former Israeli Finance Minister >Ne'eman, Yuval- Israeli Physicist >Obuchi, Keizo - Prime Minister of Japan >Oz, Amos - Israeli writer >Palmer, Robert - CEO of Digital Equipment Corporation-DEC >Paulson, Henry - Co-Chairman Goldman Sachs >Persson, Goran - Prime Minister of Sweden >Pfeiffer, Eckhard - CEO of Compaq >Phelan, John - Former CEO NYSE & Director of ML and the BCG >Phypers, Dean - Former CFO of IBM >Platt, Lewis - CEO Hewlitt Packard-HP >Pope John Paul II - Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church-RCC >Pottruck, David - Charles A. Schwab & Company >Primakov, Yevgeny - Russian Prime Minister >Prodi, Romano - Former Prime Minister of Italy >Purcell, Philip - CEO of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter >Ramos, Fidel - Former President of Philippines >Raymond, Lee - CEO Exxon >Redstone, Sumner - CEO of Viacom - HBO >Reichman, Uriel - President of the Inter Disciplinary Center- IDC Israel >Reichmann, Paul - Canadian Businessman >Rodin, Judith - President of the University of Pennsylvania >Roosa, Robert - Former Chairman Brown Brothers Harriman (of blessed >emory) >Samuelson, Paul - MIT Economics Nobel Laureate >Santer, Jacques - President of the European Commission-EC >Schiro, James - CEO PriceWaterhouse Coopers- PWC >Schroeder, Gerhard - German Chancellor >Schwab, Charles - Charles A. Schwab & Company >Sharman, Colin - Chairman KPMG >Shipley, Walter - CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank >Spielberg, Stephen - Hollywood Film Producer >Slahor, Paul - Founding Investor in IPC >Slavin, Shmuel - Director General of Israel's Finance Ministry >Smith,

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

Nikoli: calm down guy. It's Memorial Day weekend. Bill's gonna take his family on a vacation. Remember those?
If Clinton was enough of a mastermind and a maniac to plan the nuclear destruction of America, don't you think he'd be able to muzzle some unknown congressman from Bumfuque, Wyoming? I mean, couldn't he just unscrew his propellor or cut his brake line?

-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

a,
much as I admire most of your posts you have this unfortunate "blind spot" with Clinton. The guy is a traitor, a rapist and a murderer. The boot hill body count is real - his goons are real, his handlers are real, his agenda is real. He is out of control in Yugo, he has decimated our military, he is rabidly provoking several countries NOW and he has removed our launch on warning capability and abandoned the anti-missile defence plan that Reagon initiated.
And you make jokes about Bumfucque, Indiana.
We're the ones that are going to experience Clinton's version of Bumfucqueing USA - real soon.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 24, 1999.

--a, If you had bothered to read the post obove you would see that clinton is spending is vacation in Portugal, along with 300 some odd of the richest and most powerful socialist on the planet . The Agenda of the meeting is very simple, Place further pressure on nations which are resisting loss of their national sovereignty through banking and trade sanctions. If that fails call out NATO and bomb the shit out of them. Peace through superior firepower. Get with the program or die. You might also note the attendence of his full complement of Jews who don't know they're jews warmongers, Trent Lott republican backstabbers leader, and Tony-tootuff-Blair. At the end of the meetings they'll all stand together and sing Mommie was a commie while toasting the desolation of America with a shot of Popov. You might also notice the conspicuous abscence of all the ceo's who went down along with Ron Brown in the last coup de ta. Get with the program or die.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

Whatever.

-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

Nikoli:
Saw your alert post over on FS's PB, thanks for the heads-up. Just a thought - some might not see it here, you might consider posting it as a new message on the main Y2000 board here.
Again thanks.
klm

-- klm (klm@nowhre.not), May 24, 1999.

a,
I too have appreciated all you have brought to this forum but I'll have to agree with Andy on your blind spot. We have so much in common otherwise, I'll be polite in disagreeing with you on herr klinton.
I do agree with you that this weekend is not the weekend.
It seems that we all have been trying to get a handle on the NWO and where klinton's allegience lies. In my view the confusion is whether klinton is aligned with the capitalist Bilderbergers or with the communists. Recent writings are showing that he wants to forge a 'third way', a blend of socialism and capitalism. The third way amounts to nothing more than than government control and loss of freedom. He is trying to bring both sides together. But he is doomed to failure.
In his attempt to win over China and Russia, he has given over our greatest military secrets to please China, and has reduced our military to please Russia. But the commies are cold, ruthless and have their own agenda, its their way, not the third way. Now the bilderbergers inc. have a problem. The Chinese use to be their trump card against Russia. Now Russia, China, India, N.Korea, and the Muslim nations are in an alliance. That meeting in Portugal is about this new alliance and its threat to their wealth and power. Their only choice is negotiation. I received the following email from Nyquist. I post it one more time.
======================================================================
I'm afraid I don't agree with the article put out by WorldNetDaily. It partakes too much of Russian propaganda. Yes, the Russian's have been insulted, but the Communist propaganda about a capitalist conspiracy against Russian sovereignty is untrue. In fact, those in America who attack the CFR as the world's arch-villain are echoing Stalinist propaganda from the 1930s, and also Nazi propaganda from the same time period. In fact, substitute the word "Jews" for CFR and you can literally use the same tracts the Nazis used -- word for word. While the capitalists are not boyscouts out for the world's good, their goal is to increase international trade, profits, and the movement of money across borders.This is not evil. It is merely business. The fault with this lies in its propensity to internationalism,(Or NWO,or one world gov. etc.), and its stupid reliance on arms control and disarmament agreements, as well as the technology transfers with which they hope to "corrupt" the Communist systems in Russia and China, opening the way for freedom and democracy (i.e., shopping malls and freeways). Sadly, it is Wall Street and Big Business that has been duped by the Communists, and not the other way around. Far from being part of a brilliant CFR strategy to destroy Russia, the NATO attack on Yugoslavia is a classic bungle. There is no victory possible for NATO here. If this crisis continues it will break NATO into fragments,leaving the US alone and isolated. In that aloneness the Russians and Chinese will be able to nuke us into rubble with impunity. This has been the plan made in Moscow for decades. It has been testified to by defectors from Anatoliy Golitsyn and Jan Sejna, to Stanislav Lunev. The military preparations of Russia and China in recent months shows their intention, and now they are merely exploiting an opportunity to mobilize their people and their military behind a war they are prepared to win. This future war will not be a minor conflict in the Balkans, but a war to smash America -- to destroy America once and forever. The CFR will be killed in such a war, and the New World Order will be Leninist -- not capitalist. To imagine that the New World Order is a serious threat is itself a mistake -- a misreading of the international game. The U.N. and the CFR don't have any nuclear missiles pointed at Los Angeles or New York (any more than "the Jews" are plotting the destruction of the world). The Bilderbergers are not the one's who've penetrated the CIA with moles like Ames and Nicholson. All the missiles pointed at us are sitting in Russia and China, controled by Communists like Primakov and Sergeyev. All the thefts of military secrets have been accomplished by Russia and China. If the button is pushed, it won't be Nelson Rockefeller doing the honors -- it will be General Yakovlev, secreted in a command bunker 1200 feet beneath some mountain in the Urals. Let's not take our eyes off the real threat -- and a very real enemy. It's time to stop fantasizing and work with facts.
J.
======================================================================
If this is true then the commies will not bomb when klinton is in Portugal but here, in D.C.
BB

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), May 24, 1999.

klm: you dissed me on the other thread. I'm not letting you get away so easily:
klm: I'm not saying that mistakes have not been made, in Kosovo, in the Gulf War, or Vietnam. There's little doubt its all a fucked up mess. But the fact of the matter is that Americans have prospered immensely (on average, and so far) from our military policies, and we continue to be the leader of the free world. I reiterate my position that Kosovo is a pre-emptive plan to forward deploy troops to the Eurasian theater in preparation for the inevitable chaos that will be unleashed by y2k and the associated economic collapse. Communism, as evidenced by the recent turning of events in Russia, China, N. Korea and other non-allied countries, is getting ready to ride again, and "democracy", however sinister some of its supports may be, will not, and should not, allow this to happen.
As long as you are armchair quarterbacking, explain how we could have handled these situations better.
Hint: Don't suggest diplomacy. That was tried and failed.
-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

"dissed"?
Speak English, and I *may* respond.

-- klm (klm@nowhre.not), May 24, 1999.

BTW, when did they assign you to me?

-- klm (klm@nowhre.not), May 24, 1999.

From Webster's online (English version):
Main Entry: dis
Pronunciation: 'dis
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): dissed; dis7sing
Etymology: perhaps short for disrespect
Date: 1986
1 slang : to treat with disrespect or contempt : INSULT
2 slang : to find fault with : CRITICIZE 
What's wrong? Having trouble finding your history book? :)

-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

BB, I agree with everything Mr. Nyquist said in that e-mail. It's what he left unsaid that differentiates my opinion from yours. That being that Bill Clinton has purposely destroyed our ability to make a meaningful response to a nuclear attack, and thereby assured that one will occur and it will be wildly succesful. If you understand this then you are left with three conclusions.
1. He is totally insane.
2. He is a communist agent.
3. The NWO elite are preparing to have the United States and the Russo-Chinese destroy each other.
I believe that it is number three. If you accept that Bill Clinton and his trilateralist-cfr-bildeberger compadres are indeed trying to achieve the goal of one world government, which by the way they openly admit, then you should realize they don't intend to be killed in the process. If a nuclear war breaks out it will be instigated by them at the moment of their choosing. I think the russians are reading the situation just as I am and are hedging their bets by high alerting their forces and installing a backup government and military command structure in their Ural Mountain bunkers. What I expect to happen is for someone to detonate a weapon, launch a missile, or fly a bomber into russian territory which will instigate an immediate nuclear response from Russia and China, followed by a counterstrike from whatever we have left to shoot with. N. korea will invade S. Korea, China will invade Taiwan and Japan, Iraq will retake Kuwait and possibly Saudi Arabia. NATO will crumble, and the giant night of Y2K will descend on the European , African, and Asian continents. On the far dawn of the rebuilding of civilization those same old banking families, having looted the gold treasuries of the world in the waning years of this century, will come slithering back with all their wealth to finance reconstruction. And they'll have a shining new idea. Never again will they allow the stupid masses to destroy the world, or even own weapons of any kind. No more national borders, just government zones. No more standing armies, except for theirs. Who said we caused the last war? Have that man shot immediately. Now do you understand why clinton and company won't be home when the lights go out?

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), May 24, 1999.

No relation to Nimrod, Shimrod is a character in Jack Vance's Lyonesse trilogy :-)
Ordering potassium iodide tablets tomorrow...price has gone up over 50% since a few months ago...

-- Shimrod (shimrod@lycosmail.com), May 25, 1999.

Thanks Nik et al,
my gut feeling - things are coming to a head, solar flares and weird weather patterns fit in too, the millenniun approaching, wild and dangerous uncalled-for actions by the USA and England (note - the USA/UK - no other nations are exhibiting signs of this aggressive terminal madness) - shootings, road-rage, drugs, booze, debt, divorce, infidelity - all on the increase as people retreat and fail to cope with 20th century schizoid man - this is the way it is designed to be at this point in time - time is up, time for a little culling, a little musical chairs, time for a new w.o.
done deal, nothing we can do now, just sit back and watch the freak show...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 25, 1999.

Hi Nik,
I respond as one searching for the truth not claiming to have it. The question you raise here is THE Question: Is Clinton PURPOSELY DESTROYING our nuclear capability. And if so why. You list three possibilities and I don't find myself in any one of the three. I find myself in all three.
Yes, he is maybe not totally insane but foolish, irrational, and completely misunderstanding and misreading Russian intentions. Carter was irrational as he worked for world peace. He let our defenses down so bad that Russia was on the move. Thank God for Reagan. Clinton who is working for world peace is doing the same thing. I know this is hard to believe but he doesn't see the Russian agenda or threat. He thinks that Russia is really interested in being capitalists. He believes the Soviet Union has actually dissolved. He believes there really was a coupe and that communism is dead and the cold war is over. He is not only insane but stupid. His dumming down our military is simply his way of negotiating with the Russians, then using the money elsewhere for political purposes. Clinton does not believe there will be a soviet attack so he ignores the military.
He is a communist agent in that he used Chinese money to get himself elected. Now he is being blackmailed by China. So he looks the other way as secrets are given away to them. He is also a communist agent in that he imbibed Leninist doctrine from Professor Quigley while at Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar. But he is not a full fledged communist as he is a bilderberger as well. This is why it is important to see Clinton as trying to forge this 'third way'. Which is why I disagree with your idea that he is number three: part of a nwo plan to have the U.S. and Russia/China blow themselves up.
Yes, the NWO bilderbergers want a one world government and army, and yes that means somehow getting rid of american sovereignty and military but I don't believe they are concocting a nuclear war to accomplish this. It would destroy their corporations and vast holdings. It would destroy the world economy that now makes them rich and powerful. As Nyquist points out, they are trying to build their NWO thru arms control agreements, and missile reductions through negotiations. Unilateral disarmament is their agenda. But what is this? Russia has not been complying? What is this: Russia has actually taken all the money the NWO elite has been sending them to encourage them to join them and built up her military and missile systems instead? We have all been duped by the blind media, including our politicians. Thank God for Nyquist, the only clear head that I can tell who is reading the situation correctly. Before him, Joel Skousen was the only one blowing the whistle on a coming nuclear strike. But he has layers of conspiracies and it doesn't hold together as well as Nyquist's.
So I totally disagree with your belief that the CFR-Bilderberger-nwo elite is instigating a nuclear war. They have no missiles as Nyquist points out. They have NATO who is dependent on the U.S. We now know the U.S. is a sitting duck. No, the nuclear exchange will be instigated by Russia, not the NWO crowd. And when they do, the NWO crowd will run for cover. But it will be too late. Russia has its special forces all ready to kill U.S. key leaders and world leaders when their attack goes down. They will shock the world. Our only hope is God. Be well.
BB

-- BB (peace2@bellatlantic.net), May 25, 1999.

I just heard Frank Gaffney on Rush Limbaugh (after just purchasing a new Waterford wood stove.) Gaffney also knows the score. Check his website, 'Center for Security Policy' (security-policy.org).
He is saying the same thing about clinton that Nyquist is saying. In essence, our boy has a counter-culture mentality that despises the military, intelligence, and security policies and laws. Gaffney pointed out that clinton's mindset needs to be understood to understand his actions. clinton sees himself as a global citizen and that America has no right to be more powerful than any other country. He wants America to be just like any other country. In essence, he has a liberal democrat foreign policy.
That doesn't mean he wants to see the U.S. nuked either. He hides behind NATO and doesn't understand the communist/Islam threat. His cabinet is also liberal democrat who believe that the best deterrence is not strength but weakness. That is it in a nutshell. He wants the bilderberger crowd to be in charge, but he wants them to have socialist control and power. So does Tony Blair, another liberal democrat. Their policy is tailor made for the communists. They are our true enemy.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), May 25, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ