Khrushchev : “Your children will live under communism.” IS OBAMA FULFILLING THE PROFECY?
Dark Predictions of a KGB Defector
Posted By Jamie Glazov On October 19, 2010 @ 12:05 am In FrontPage
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Jason McNew, a veteran of the United States Air Force and an IT Professional who works for the federal government in Washington, D.C. He has been studying communism, asymmetric warfare, and the works of Soviet defectors for over 10 years. He his a regular contributor to American Thinker, and his work has been cited on numerous other websites, including WND, Hot Air, and The Blaze. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org .
FP: Jason McNew, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
I would like to talk to you today about Anatoliy Mikhaylovich Golitsyn, the famous Soviet KGB agent who defected to the CIA in 1961. This man’s revelations have much relevance to the threats the United States faces today.
Let’s begin by you telling us a bit about Golitsyn and why what he had to say is still vitally important for the West to heed.
McNew: Thank you for having me Dr. Glazov. It’s an honor for me to have an opportunity to talk with you here at Frontpage.
Golitsyn was a Russian KGB Major who, as you point out, defected from the Soviet Union to the West in 1961. He walked into the American embassy in Helsinki, Finland, and requested to see the CIA station chief there. Golitsyn himself provided the name of this station chief, information which should have definitely been unknown to him. He further offered secret documents from the nearby Soviet embassy, and stated that more information would be forthcoming if he and his family could be immediately evacuated to the United States. Along with his wife and daughter, Golitsyn left Finland on Christmas day of 1961, aboard a US military aircraft.
While there were many Soviet defectors during the Cold War, the majority of them were providing (knowingly or not) information which was purposefully designed by the Soviets to mislead their main enemy, the United States and its CIA. It wasn’t until 1984 with the publication of his first book, New Lies for Old, that Anatoliy Golitsyn became known to the public. His book, most of which had actually been written before 1980, was ridiculed and ignored.
By 1991, the Berlin Wall had been torn down and the USSR was dissolved by Gorbachev — events which Golitsyn had written about several years prior (in the last chapter of New Lies for Old.) In total, there were nearly 150 predictions in the last chapter of the book, and over 90 percent of them eventually proved to be correct. This seems impossible based on what our accepted notions of rationality are, however it must be kept in mind that communists (and their strategies) are “differently rational,” if you will.
The re-emergence of communism now (albeit with all manner of different names) craves explanation. Clearly communism did not just “die” in 1991  as everyone was led (told) to believe. Golitsyn’s works are the key to understanding how the ancient principles of Sun Tzu (warfare based on deception) can be practically applied as a comprehensive national strategy. This is exactly what the Soviets (and now “neo-Soviets”) have done. By “neo-Soviets” I mean Vladimir Putin and his ilk in the Kremlin and Lubyanka.
FP: Tell us about some of Golitsyn’s most significant predictions.
McNew: Golitysn has now become (somewhat) famous for having warned in advance that the USSR was going to break itself up as part of a strategic ruse. On page 339 of his book New Lies for Old, there appears the following paragraphs:
The “liberalization” would be spectacular and impressive. Formal pronouncements might be made about a reduction in the communist party’s role: its monopoly would be apparently curtailed. An ostensible separation of powers between the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary might be introduced. The Supreme Soviet would be given greater apparent power, and the president of the Soviet Union and the first secretary of the party might well be separated. The KGB would be “reformed.” Dissidents at home would be amnestied; those in exile abroad would be allowed to return, and some would take up positions of leadership in government.
There would be greater freedom for Soviet citizens to travel. Western and Unitized Nations observers would be invited to the Soviet Union to witness the reforms in action.
Sakharov might be included in some capacity in the government or allowed to teach aboard. The creative arts and cultural and scientific organizations, such as the writers’ unions and Academy of Sciences, would become apparently more independent, as would the trade unions. Political clubs would be opened to nonmembers of the communist party. Leading dissidents might form one or more alternative political parties
So here we have over a dozen very specific predictions, all of which later proved to be completely correct – and this is only a small excerpt of the total.
One of the more interesting predictions which we still see playing itself out on the world stage today, is Golitsyn’s assertion that North American influence in Latin America would be undermined. This is blatantly obvious in Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, the recent readoption of a socialist constitution by Bolivia, and also the entrance into the BRIC alliance by Brazil (to name a few).
FP: It does appear that communism did not really “die” in 1991 as the West portrayed and understood its death. Indeed, the Soviets did have some kind of plan and it has something to do with Putin and his gang being in power today. Expand on this for us.
McNew: In 1959 Nikita Khrushchev boasted to a US cabinet member “You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.”
As Jeff Nyquist points out, “It is noteworthy that Khrushchev did not say, “You will live under communism.” He also did not say, “Your children will live under communism.” He told his American opposites that their grandchildren would live under communism. Khrushchev was admitting that Moscow’s plan was a long-range plan, involving decades of work.”
In a July 1984 memoranda to the CIA, a year before Mikhail Gorbachev took power, Golitsyn had specifically fingered Gorbachev as being the intended replacement for Konstantin Chernenko. Golitsyn later provided insights on the eventual replacement of Boris Yeltsin as well, describing Russian hostilities in Chechnya “not as a likely cause of a military coup, but as a possible planned prelude to a change of government.” When Yeltsin stepped down unexpectedly in 1999, this gave rise to Vladimir Putin. Due to Putin’s very forceful handling of the war in Chechnya, he easily won election to the Presidency a few months later, riding a wave of renewed Russian nationalism.
The current “President” of Russia is of course Dmitry Medvedev, but even the very naïve “mainstream” media here in the US understands that it is Putin who is actually pulling Russia’s strings. There is also a lot of cynicism about the fairness of elections in Russia, and there is much speculation that Putin will run again (and win) in 2012, since the Russian Constitution does not prevent him from doing so. So what we have is a decades-long pattern of “continuity of leadership” in the former Soviet Union, and now in Russia. It would be simply impossible to execute a long range strategy like Golitsyn describes, in a real democracy where the national direction can change every 4 or 8 years. Vladimir Putin has himself admitted to being made “in the Soviet mold.” Putin is a communist and is the logical extension of the Soviets long range plans.
So, it appears that Khrushchev was right in his assertion that we in the US would be eat the communist elephant one socialist bite at a time.
FP: Jason McNew, thanks for joining Frontpage Interview.
To see the Symposium Secrets of Communism’s “Collapse,” click here .
Publicado: 10-20-2010 09:57 AM
With 64-Seat Pick-Up, GOP Will Win Control of House
With less than two weeks to go before the November 2 voting, it is not difficult to find predictions of a Republican take-over of the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in four years. From pollster Scott Rasmussen’s prediction of a net Republican gain of 55 seats (see “Politics,” Page 21) to analyst Michael Barone’s forecast of net GOP gains not seen since 1946 or 1928 “if the turnout is high,” the punditocracy clearly senses a Republican tsunami.
They are on target. After looking closely at the record number of competitive House contests, here’s how I see it:
The current partisan make-up of the House is 256 Democrats and 179 Republicans (there are actually two vacancies, but the seats held by two lawmakers who resigned earlier this year, Democrat Eric Massa of New York and Republican Mark Souder of Indiana, are counted in the columns of their respective parties).
The new line-up
I see the new House line-up as 242 Republicans and 193 Democrats. Here is how I come to that conclusion:
Of the 18 seats being relinquished by Democrats, in alphabetical order by state, Republicans will pick up15 now held by Representatives Berry (Ark.-1), Snyder (Ark.-2), Ellsworth (Ind.-8), Moore (Kan.-3), Melancon (La.-3), Delahunt (Mass.-10), Stupak (Mich.-1), Hodes (N.H.-2), Massa (N.Y.-29), Sestak (Pa.-7), Kennedy (R.I.-1), Tanner (Tenn.-3), Gordon (Tenn.-6), Baird (Wash.-3), Obey (Wis.-7). Those pick-ups put the House break-down at 241 Democrats and 194 Republicans.
Democrats will hold the seats being relinquished by Democratic Representatives Davis (Ala.-7), Watson (Calif.-33) and Meek (Fla.-17). They will also retain the seats of two Democrats defeated in primaries: Kilpatrick (Mich.-13) and Mollohan (W.Va.-1).
Of the 20 seats being relinquished by Republicans, the GOP will retain the 18 now held by Representatives Shadegg (Ariz.-3), Boozman (Ark.-3), Radanovich (Calif.-19), Brown-Waite (Fla.-5), Putnam (Fla.-12), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Fla.-21), Linder (Ga.-7), Buyer (Ind.-4), Souder (Ind.-3), Moran (Kan.-1), Tiahrt (Kan.-4), Hoekstra (Mich.-2), Ehlers (Mich.-3), Blunt (Mo.-7), Fallin (Okla.-5), Brown (S.C.-1), Barrett (S.C.-3), and Wamp (Tenn.-3). They will also hold on to the seats of the two Republicans who lost renomination: Griffith (Ala.-5) and Inglis (S.C.-4).
Democrats will pick up two seats held by outgoing Republicans: Castle (Del.-AL) and Kirk (Ill.-10). These outcomes make the House lineup 243 Democrats and 192 Republicans.
50 Democrats Defeated
In the biggest changes, Republican challengers will defeat these 50 Democratic incumbents:
No GOP Loss
Not a single Republican House member will lose re-election.
New House Line-Up
These results mean the line-up in the next U.S. House will be 242 Republicans and 193 Democrats, or the largest GOP majority in the House since 1946.
Publicado: 10-27-2010 12:51 PM
US GOVERNMENT COMMUNISTS
ResistNet and CommieBlaster ^ | October 29, 2010 | Asst Natl Dir Mellie
Communists, Socialists, Marxists, Maoists and Islamics are in the US Government. They all believe in a government that’s opposed to the US Constitution and, thus, the America our founders created. They want America to give up its sovereignty and to become a member of a one-world socialist government. For simplicity, let’s call them all “commies”.
We began researching Obama and other commies in US Government and Media about 18 months ago and were shocked. Here’s the high-level overview of what we learned, which is chronicled in great detail at CommieBlaster.com:
- America has been at war with communism for over 90 years. The Cold War with Communist Russia did not end with the collapse of the Berlin War -- it just took a different form. A new war has commenced… a bloodless war aimed at taking all of our wealth and giving it to Communists, so they can rule America. This well-planned, decades-old, Communist Takeover is now in progress and we’ve been losing this war because Communists captured our media long ago and they hid this plan from us for years.
- The public code words for Communism now are “Progressive”, “Democracy” and “Social Justice”. You probably never heard these terms much until Obama took office, but you hear them now a lot these days.
- The Democratic Party is now a Socialist Party. Through its freely admitted, long term alliance and coordinated initiatives with The Party of European Socialists, the Democratic Party is openly connected to Chinese and Russian Socialists, as well as a full range of international commies and terrorists.
- Right now in the US Congress, there’s a publicly admitted Socialist, a couple of socialist Islamics, lots of criminals (assault, bribes, etc.), lots of anti-Constitutionalists, and way too many people who are taking money from Islamic terrorist-connected organizations. But don’t let that fool you. There are over 100 US Congress Members who are commies. Most belong to and/or are associated with members of Democratic Socialists of America and the Communist Party USA. The FBI states that the Communist Party USA and the United Nations are departments of the Russian KGB.
- Barack Hussein Obama (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Saebarkah), the 44th President of the United States of America is a communist. Obama precisely fits former FBI head, J. Edgar Hoover’s definition of a communist. He has associations with members of the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, was raised by communists, spent his adult life with communists, was mentored by communists, supports communists, belonged to at least one communist organization, attended at least one communist rally, worked for at least two communist bosses, is advised by communists and now, while in office, regularly meets with communists on a daily basis.
- Obama is an ideological zealot and radical. His core skill is “communist rabble-rousing”. George Soros directly and indirectly funded Obama’s presidential campaign. Obama is George Soros’ puppet. Obama is told what to say by a teleprompter’s script that is written by a George Soros-funded group of commie writers. Obama has a PR organization of over 300 commies.
- Our research strongly suggests George Soros is the face of the USA Communist Takeover. Obama works for George Soros. Most of the media works for George Soros as his propaganda department. Hundreds of socialist, activist and union organizations work for Soros as a means to siphon government money from you, generate votes for commie Democrats and fund the Communist Takeover. Examples of the organizations Soros funds include the Democratic Party, SEIU, ACORN, Tides Foundation, National Public Radio, ACLU, Open Society Institute, Moveon.org and Obama’s favorite fake media outlet, the Huffington Post.
- Goldman Sachs works for George Soros. There is a strong body of evidence to suggest that George Soros, with the help of Jeffrey Sachs of Goldman Sachs, caused the 2008 US financial collapse (Soros and Sachs have done this in other countries before). “Crisis” is Phase Two in the four-phase Communist Takeover Plan. Soros and Sachs can further crash or damage our economy pretty much whenever they want.
- George Soros is a very bad dude and is a far, far greater threat to America than al Queada. George Soros is not only converting America to communism, he’s doing the same in other countries. Remember “the Domino Theory?” Soros may also be coordinating with al Queada and/or terrorists through his connections with Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and/or other radical organizations which Soros funds.
- George Soros’ “boss” is one or more of the following: Communist Russia, Communist China and/or a band of Ultra Rich Global Elites. Soros’ supporters and co-conspirators include Bill and Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates (Microsoft), Eric Schmidt (Google), Jeffrey Sachs (Goldman Sachs), NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey and a vast group of other global elites. Their combined wealth is greater than many countries.
RESISTING THE TAKEOVER: Exposure and awareness of George Soros, Obama, commie Congress members and their international criminal conspiracy is the key to Americans winning this war. Once the conspirators are exposed, they can be researched, contained, neutralized and prosecuted. So educate yourself and tell others. Vote out all Democrats.
THE TAKEOVER PLAN’S PRIMARY WEAKNESS: There is a very substantial body of evidence that indicates Obama is ineligible to serve as US President (father’s British citizenship, multiple social security numbers, foreign student, no long form birth certificate, no hospital that will claim him, no US State certified him as constitutionally eligible to be President, tremendous efforts undertaken to prevent access to Obama’s past records, etc., etc.). If Obama is found ineligible to serve, the Communist Takeover Plot will unravel fast. All laws signed by Obama will be nullified. Then, once unraveled, we can pursue the relationships of all of George Soros’ commie organizations and prosecute all of the related criminal conspirators to the maximum extent of US law.
So don’t you think that when the GOP takes over one or both Houses of Congress in January, they ought to immediately ask Obama for proof of his eligibility to serve? If not, what does that tell you about who may be running the Republican Party? Maybe the takeover is further along than we think?
Publicado: 10-31-2010 12:50 AM
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer said Friday that most illegal immigrants coming across the Mexico/US border are smuggling drugs; a labor union that represents almost 20,000 border patrol agents heavily disputed Brewer’s comments.
"Well, we all know that the majority of the people that are coming to Arizona and trespassing are now becoming drug mules," Brewer said. "They're coming across our borders in huge numbers. The drug cartels have taken control of the immigration.”
"So they are criminals. They're breaking the law when they are trespassing and they're criminals when they pack the marijuana and the drugs on their backs," Brewer said.
Reporters asked Brewer to explain her comments and she replied that many illegal immigrants crossing the border are coming to look for work but "are accosted, and they become subjects of the drug cartels."
In a CNN interview Friday, T.J. Bonner of the National Border Patrol Council said Brewer's claims were "clearly not the case." Bonner said there are some illegal immigrants coming across the border that carry drugs, and of those some say that they felt pressure from the drug cartels, but that the percentage is low. And if it was the case, there would be more drug related prosecutions.
Bonner said that her comments don't "comport with reality -- that's the nicest way to put it."
After making the public comments earlier on Friday, Brewer later released a statement that read:
"The simple truth is that the majority of human smuggling in our state is under the direction of the drug cartels, which are by definition smuggling drugs," Brewer's said.
"It is common knowledge that Mexican drug cartels have merged human smuggling with drug trafficking."
Brewer said the "human rights violations that have taken place (by the cartels) victimizing immigrants and their families are abhorrent."
Brewer’s new controversial immigration law is scheduled to begin July 29, and it has some people around the country outraged saying that it supports racism.
One week ago, a senior official at the White House announced that Obama administration lawyers will file a legal challenge against the Arizona immigration law within the next month, according to a breaking news report from CNN. This came after Hillary Clinton stated that a lawsuit would be brought against the state in a televised interview. Lawyers are expected to fill the legal challenge shortly before the new law would take effect on July 29. For more about that story, click here.
President Obama expressed his dislike for the bill and spoke about comprehensive immigration legislation, which would include a pathway for citizenship for some people who are in the country illegally. To read and see more about President Obama’s reaction to the bill, click here.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer met with President Obama on June 3 about Arizona’s concerns, and Brewer came out of the meeting sounded positive about Obama’s response. During the meeting, Obama said that the issue of a lawsuit against the state of Arizona for its new law would be up to the Department of Justice. For more on that story,click here.
Publicado: 01-17-2011 04:43 PM