You are on page 1of 18


com: Analysis of Strategic Threats




By Joel M. Skousen


World Affairs Brief



Strategic threats are carefully planned threats by predator nations or groups that transcend their own normal
sphere of influence and threaten the entire world with conquest and/or control. In this analysis I will discuss
three current strategic world powers, which constitute a premeditated threat to world liberty, and the complex
tactical maneuvers between them as they position themselves for the coming, inevitable conflict. Two of these
world powers are nations--Russia and China--and the third is a transnational conspiracy of power by a
combination of individuals in the West attempting to maneuver the world into a New World Order (NWO) of
global control, euphemistically masquerading as a "global democracy." I will refer to the latter as Western
globalists. All less powerful nations in the world fall under the influence of one of these three powers, either as
direct allies, client states for the purchase of arms, and/or diplomatic allies working in collusion to further
strategic goals of global hegemony. There is one further complicating factor, however. The Western globalists
are divided into two main factions: a US/British faction firmly in control of the financial means of the NWO,
and a European faction of hard-core leftists, secretly aligned with Moscow, which controls the majority of votes
in the General Assembly of the UN. I will attempt to describe each of the three power centers, their allies, and
what I believe their individual strategy involves.


Ever since the rise of the Bolsheviks in 1917, all of Russia’s resources have been focused on building a world
empire under Communism. Despite taking no pains to conceal its ultimate goal of destruction of capitalism
Russia has been curiously assisted by certain Western political and financial powers in its spreading
Communism to other nations. Numerous books document damning evidence of US State Department collusion
with the CIA and key Western journalists to facilitate Communist takeovers of Eastern Europe, China, North
Korea, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Iran, Angola, Mozambique and numerous other small nations.
But the mother of all deceptions was reserved for the carefully planned "fall of the Soviet Union" in 1989 and


This last great ruse by Russia was a carefully planned gesture, not unlike previous attempts by Lenin and (1 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

Stalin to put on a more human face in order to secure needed technology transfers and monetary assistance
from the West. The latest and most sophisticated version of the masquerade will culminate in Russia’s long
anticipated attack on the West. Soviet defector Anatoly Golitsyn, in 1984, warned the CIA and the world about
this ruse in his book, "New Lies For Old," but it was given little publicity. Golitsyn, not yet savvy about the
high level treason that had a grip upon the US government and the establishment media, could not figure out
why no one was interested in his warning. Not only were Western intelligence agencies and the press not
interested in Golitsyn’s warning, they were about to join in the propaganda promoting this deception in order to
make sure Western observers would believe it.

The Berlin Wall did, in fact, come down in 1989 and the Soviet armies did leave Europe in 1990, but the
freedom movement and the overthrow of Communist regimes by "reformers" were not as spontaneous as they
were made to appear. Anyone close to the action could see huge holes in the story--holes that a scrutinizing
press corps should easily have perceived, but chose not to. Uncharacteristically, the freedom movement among
university students in Leipzig had suddenly began to flourish, uninhibited by the Stazi, deep within the East
German police state. No Western journalist dared utter the obvious question: why were students who had not
dared to demonstrate the week before, suddenly free to do so without reprisal? Orders had obviously been given
to the secret police to give the students a free hand. All student organizations had been infiltrated but no arrests
of dissidents were made. Assurances were planted among student leaders that demonstrations would be
tolerated. At least two heads of Eastern European states (Erik Honeker of the DDR and Nicolai Ceausescu of
Romania) said prior to their deaths that the Russians had ordered them to step down (as if in response to public
fervor), and to turn over power to specific groups that had quickly put on the mask of "reformers," but that were
still Soviet controlled. Honeker obeyed and was allowed to live, while Ceausescu refused and was killed by his
own secret police. Romanians weren’t fooled by the sudden change in leadership in Romania; most knew the
new "anti-Communist" leaders were still part of the old guard.


A close look at the failed "coup" against Russian Premier Mikhail Gorbachev will easily demonstrate that this
was an obvious fraud set up for Western consumption. Anyone who believes the KGB was so bungling that it
couldn’t capture Gorbachev at his unprotected dacha, or so tolerant that it would allow any real democratic
opposition to maintain uninhibited access to radio and television, hasn’t studied modern Russian police state
tactics. In fact, Yeltsin was never anything but a puppet figurehead present to give the illusion of an emerging
democracy. Furthermore, when the supposed heads of the KGB, and GRU, as well as the Defense Minister
and other top leaders "fled for their lives" after the "failed coup attempt," the press should have been asking:
who were they fleeing from? These men were supposedly in control of all the organs of power in Russia. Either
they really were the heads and were faking their own self-imposed exile, or they were not the real leaders and
were toppled to further the ruse. Notably, all of these top "leaders," including Gorbachev, had been only mid-
level bureaucrats two years before. How do we explain their sudden rise to power, except that others selected
them? And if other hidden leaders selected them, those secret leaders hold the real power today. Everything else
that gives the appearance of Russian democracy is just window dressing for Western consumption. That isn’t to
say that the Russians haven’t allowed some legitimate opposition to arise, but it is always kept in a minority
status and without access to the real reins of power.

It is my contention that the Communist leaders are still in charge behind the scenes today. In fact they never
were out of power. I’m not referring to the stodgy old hard liners that are playing the role of open Communist
deputies in the Duma (Russian Parliament). The real Russian leaders, like Boris Berezovsky, bequeathed to
themselves all the former state enterprises (under the guise of "privatization") and are now referred to as the
Russian Mafia. Even a cursory look at their backgrounds, shows that virtually every one of these "Mafia" chiefs
was a top Communist leader in some part of the former Soviet leadership. The Communist bosses have also
maintained tight control over the Russian banking system so as to shuffle Western aid money back and forth
between their secret slush funds in Europe and the Middle East. As evidence of the power plays behind the
scenes, one astute observer noticed that President Boris Yeltsin, at a high level meeting in the Kremlin, stepped (2 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

aside and let Boris Berezovsky enter the room first. This would never be done in Russian protocol unless
Berezovsky were Yeltsin’s superior. Naturally, these real powers behind the Russian "democracy" generally
stay behind the scenes and rarely take key government positions--just as in the West where powerful men direct
affairs from behind the scenes.


To further the deception, current Russian president Vladimir Putin continually rails against Russian Mafia
leaders like Berezovsky and Gusinsky, issuing a steady stream of indictments, as if the Russian government is
actively pursuing these international criminals. Of course, it’s all a ruse. As I have reported in my World
Affairs Briefs, Spanish intelligence documented five visits last year that Putin made to Berezovsky’s villa in
Spain just prior to Yeltsin’s downfall and Putin’s rise to power. The transcripts of their overheard discussions
were apparently centered around the need to dump Yeltsin, install Putin, and begin the process of slowly
shedding Russia’s feigned image of weakness in order to get the West accustomed to a new, assertive Russia.
As if following a script, Putin has suddenly become the new champion of Russian nationalism. He’s "tough on
crime" and supposedly opposed by liberals and old-line Communists alike. Again, it’s all a ruse. Even
Gusinsky, head of the MOST media group--Putin’s supposed arch enemy and media opposition--is playing the
role of a persecuted capitalist Jew. In fact, he is a good friend of Berezovsky and has a villa in the same
compound in Spain.


Am I saying that everything was faked in the so-called fall of Communism? Not at all. The yearning of Eastern
Europeans and Russians to be free was real. That part didn’t have to be faked. But several Eastern European
states are still under Russian silent control. Even the Russian pull-back of weapons was a partial lie. After
negotiating the removal of US missiles and nuclear weapons from Europe (INF treaty) the Soviets allowed US
inspectors to witness the destruction of the longer-range SS-20 missiles, which constituted the bulk of their
European force. But in 1986 the Russians secretly moved in more modern, shorter-range SS-23s to deep
underground bunkers in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria just prior to signing the treaty, and never
declared them or destroyed them. They didn’t remove them even after the so-called "fall of the Soviet Union,"
demonstrating Russia’s follow-on role in this fraud, even during Yeltsin’s supposed democratic regime. The
missiles in Slovakia were discovered and removed during the mid-90s, but neither the US government nor the
press has asked about the contents of other secret bunkers--which still exist today.

A portion of the image of economic and military weakness in Russia is real, however. The civilian economy
is truly in shambles--thanks to Western sabotage of the "free-market" reforms and continued hidden economic
control by the Communist-Mafia hierarchy. What else would you expect when the US government pays
millions of dollars to a leftist university like Harvard to direct the reforms? Essential elements such as private
property rights and transportation were never freed from Soviet-style control. Regulations and bureaucratic red
tape still abound, as does official corruption requiring huge pay-offs and bribes. When Russia complained about
its dire straits and perennial threat of famine, President Clinton and European leaders shipped them millions of
dollars in monetary and food aid. In fact, there was no famine. Russian farmers had plenty of crops to sell, but
they were displaced in the markets by the US food aid, which was sold to the people by Russian leaders for a
tidy profit.


As for military weakness, only the manpower side of Russian military was allowed to collapse. The Russians
purposely failed to pay troops or to maintain normal living standards within the ranks, leading to bad feelings (3 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

and discontent. However, Russian production and development of high tech conventional military
equipment has been ongoing. Huge stockpiles of tanks and mobile artillery were simply taken out of current
inventory and stockpiled. They remain dispersed in depots beyond the Ural Mountains as part of the
Conventional Forces Treaty signed with the US and NATO. This neat little treaty allowed the Russians to
match US reduction in forces without actually destroying equipment--the Russians only had to put their tanks
"out of reach." In fact, the Russians brought back some of that inventory during the Chechen conflict, and the
US let them get away with it without so much as an official protest. Additionally, although many of the rank-
and-file soldiers have left the military, the Russians did not decommission their huge corps of officers and
NCOs. Thus, Russia maintains a suspiciously top-heavy manpower structure allowing it to refill the ranks of
soldiers in a matter of months should war break out.


What about Russia’s highly touted disarmament of nuclear forces? This, too, is a grand deception, aided and
abetted by US arms controllers. The older, out-dated aspects of the Russian military complex are on display to
give the appearance of disarmament. Much of that has been dismantled at US taxpayer expense. US public
television and the Clinton Pentagon joined forces to promote the image of Russian nuclear weakness with a
highly doctored presentation entitled Missiliers, about the crumbling Soviet arsenal. A naive US General
Habiger of US Strategic Command lent his credentials to the widely publicized TV documentary, which
supposedly showed an inside view of the old and decrepit Soviet-era nuclear bunkers. It fact, they were too old
and too decrepit to be credible. US missiliers who saw the documentary refused to believe those facilities were
operational. With the exception of one limited view of the new SS-27 missile launcher, the US has never been
allowed to see Russian’s modern arsenal of weapons. Many of the older SS-18 ICBMs were dismantled in the
1990s with US taxpayer funds. The warheads, however, were not dismantled, but were given back to the
Russians for recycling into their new missiles. The Russians are clearly implementing Sun Tzu’s classic war
doctrine of "feigning weakness" prior to a strike.


The top secret Russian military-industrial complex is in full production, but it is now quite separated from the
normal, visible economy. Many suspect that Western aid and loans are almost exclusively funneled into these
hidden portions of the Russian economy. This sustains the need for continual funding from the West to support
the deprived civilian economy in Russia. However, despite feigning weakness, the Russians are continuing to
build tremendous new nuclear/biological and chemical weapons systems--all with the assistance of US
technology transfers.

In the late 1980s, the Soviet Union was seen deploying biological warheads for their multiple-warhead SS-18
ICBMs. As late as the early 1990s, after the signing of agreements pledging to destroy all biological and
chemical warfare stocks, bona fide defectors from Russia gave testimony of massive cheating on biological and
chemical weapons programs. Again, no protest was forthcoming from the US and no sanctions were imposed.

Russia is now deploying, on average, three new SS-27 missiles (also called the Topol-M--a 6th generation
ballistic missile with active maneuvering capability to evade interception) per month--replacing older SS-19
missiles located at the Sarakov missile based some 450 miles southeast of Moscow. The SS-27 can carry up to
10 small nuclear warheads, or can be armed with a single massive H-bomb developed by the Arzamas-16 site
of the Russian Ministry of Atomics (MINATOM). According to Russian weapons engineers, the new Arzamas
warhead has an explosive force equal to over half a million tons of TNT. The Washington Times has reported
that, in 1995 and 1996, this weapons developer illegally obtained US-made IBM supercomputers exported with
Clinton administration approval. The supercomputers were exported directly to the Russian weapons lab, using
false commercial and non-military contracts. This was in direct violation of US law. IBM pled guilty to the
illegal export and paid a $8.5 million fine for their illegal sale, but the damage was already done. Later
evidence proved that the Clinton administration actually facilitated the sale and gave IBM assurances of (4 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

protection. The Russians intend to build a total of 500 of these mobile missiles, each one capable of mounting
the full range of nuclear, biological or chemical warheads. This is truly an ominous weapons system, and
should be our main concern in terms of designing an Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense. We built our last modern
ICBM (the MX "Peacekeeper" missile) over 10 years ago, and will begin disarming them unilaterally in 2003.

The Russian ABM system is composed of hundreds of SA-5 and SA-10 anti-aircraft/anti-missile missiles.

Moscow not only has its nominal 100 ABM missiles, as permitted by the treaty, but also several thousand other
SAM interceptors, many of which have been upgraded with ABM capabilities. In total, Russia has 12,000 SAM/
ABM interceptors at 280 sites. The SA-10 is a totally new missile now from what it used to be and continues to
be fitted with nuclear warheads (unlike our dumbed-down proposed ABM system that has no warhead at all).
Russia has 18 huge battle-management radar installations located around the periphery of the country, as well
as in space, to direct their ABM system. Upgrades of these radar sites as new construction of several more were
carried out during the ABM treaty negotiations. US and NATO spy satellites detected these violations, but only
one radar unit was halted. It was finished two years ago and the US failed to protest this violation of the ABM
treaty. Yet Russia still demands that we abide by the treaty.

Further, the Russians are building huge underground nuclear bunkers and weapons production facilities in
the Ural Mountains, clearly intended to function during a nuclear war. "Yamantau Mountain is the largest
nuclear-secure project in the world," said US Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md). "They have very large
train tracks running in and out of it [actually 5 tracks wide], with enormous rooms carved inside the mountain.
It has been built to resist a half dozen direct nuclear hits, one after the other in a direct hole. It's very disquieting
that the Russians are doing this when they [supposedly] don't have $200 million to build the service module on
the international space station and can't pay housing for their own military people." Ken Timmerman, one of
the best sources of information on the subject says, "The Russians have constructed two entire cities over the
site, known as Beloretsk 15 & 16, which are closed to the public, each with 30,000 workers. No foreigner has
ever set foot near the site. A US military attaché stationed in Moscow was turned back when he attempted to
visit the region a few years ago..."

In public testimony before a House Armed Services Subcommittee last October, KGB defector Col. Oleg
Gordievsky said the KGB had maintained a separate, top-secret organization, known as Directorate 15, to
build and maintain a network of underground command bunkers for the Soviet leadership -- including the vast
site beneath Yamantau Mountain. When pictures of this complex were published on the front page of the New
York Times in 1996, the CIA was asked to respond. Keeping pace with the long standing secret government
policy to protect Americans from any information that would point to a Russian threat, the CIA spokesman said
the agency wasn’t worried--the huge Russian facility was purely "defensive." How do they know that when
they admit that no US official has ever visited the site?

In 1998, US Strategic Commander (STRATCOM) General Eugene Habiger, the same naive commander who
took part in the NPR propaganda documentary Missiliers, called Yamantau "a very large complex -- we
estimate that it has millions of square feet available for underground facilities. We don't have a clue as to what
they're doing there." No clue, general? Not even one clue? People this stupid obviously get to be generals
because they are predictable yes-men in a military determined to purge out any future George Pattons or
Douglas MacArthurs. I noticed in Missiliers that Habiger never mentioned the Russian military’s refusal to
answer questions about Yamantau Mountain as he waxed eloquent about the deep camaraderie and trust he felt
with his Russian military counterparts. If this is the best general we can find to head STRATCOM, the US is in
mortal danger.

The Yamantau Mountain complex is not far from Russia's main nuclear weapons lab facility, Chelyabinsk-70.
Honest military analysts suspect that Yamantau’s huge 400-square-mile underground complex houses nuclear
warhead and missile storage sites, launch control, and several full-blown nuclear weapons factories--all (5 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

designed to continue production after a nuclear war begins. The US has no equivalent to such extensive
protected production facilities. According to Ken Timmerman, the Russian government has provided no fewer
than 12 separate and contradictory explanations for the site, none of which are believed to be credible.

Russia also has a massive national command and control system dispersed among three different hardened
underground locations. Besides Yamantau Mountain, there is the Yavinsky Mountain underground complex
and the Sherapovo bunker site, south of Moscow. Sherapovo is the primary command center for Russia's
"civilian" leaders. The Kremlin is connected to Sherapovo and other bunkers by a secret subway line. Once at
Sherapovo, they can conduct the war effort using a highly redundant communications system "allowing the
leadership to send orders and receive reports through the wartime management structure," according to a 1988
Pentagon report.


It is my concerted opinion that the Russians do not want to begin their massive attack on the West with a
conventional flow of armaments and troop build-up in Europe. These types of precursor movements would be
easily detected by US and European reconnaissance satellites. Neither do the Russians want to destroy Europe
if they don’t have to. I believe that Russia is planning a massive preemptive nuclear strike on US and
British military facilities sometime in the middle of this current decade--precisely because such a strike would
decapitate Western military power within two days, without any losses to Russia, and instill fear in the rest of
the world. By concentrating the initial attack on the US and Britain, the Russians believe they can turn to
European leaders and intimidate them into submission without a fight. The Russians are optimistic they can
count on Europe’s leaders since almost every European head of state is now a member of the Socialist
International, a front for international Communism created during WWII by Moscow as a means of controlling
Europe. Russian GRU defector Col. Stanislav Lunev’s revelations about Russian military strategy and
planning, including his claim that every Russian military exercise is based on the premise of a pre-emptive
nuclear attack on the US military, tend to corroborate my suspicions.


I do not believe the intended strike is imminent just yet. It is my estimate that the Russians won’t be ready to
strike until sometime after 2004 and probably no later than 2008, despite ongoing preparations for war. Here’s
why: Despite the continual stockpiling of core supplies and other evidence of war preparations referenced in the
excellent and ongoing work of J R Nyquist, the Russians lack several elements that would ensure success, and
they won’t strike until everything is in place.

First, they desire to make sure that the US completes its unilateral disarmament of the feared MX
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). These 50 blockbuster ICBMs located in hardened silos surrounding
the Four Corners area of Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska and South Dakota are scheduled for destruction in
2003. No comparable disarmament of the Russian Topol-M missiles is being required. I don’t think the
Russians will strike before these missiles are eliminated, despite the standing orders to the military by former
President Clinton (PDD-60) to absorb a first strike and not launch on warning. Clinton told the military to be
prepared to retaliate after a first strike. Dumbfounded (but compliant as always) the top military brass want to
know, "retaliate with WHAT?" Good point! However, the Russians most likely are not counting on PDD-60.
They suspect we won’t abide by this suicidal order now that Clinton is out of office. Overall, the Russians are
inherently suspicious of US disarmament. They think the US must be cheating just like they are. Criminal
minds think alike.

Second, the US in currently engaged in a number of important transfers of military technology to Russia
involving missiles, aircraft, communications, supercomputers and space technology. Boeing has made strategic
partnership agreements with Zvezda-Strella, Russia’s premier weapons lab, for building the top secret US (6 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

Joint Strike Fighter. NASA transferred sensitive space technology and money to Russia when Russia claimed
they couldn’t afford to complete their portion of the International Space Station. The US Navy sent the
Russians technical upgrades to their anti-ship missile systems which are now being deployed in Russia and
China and targeting US warships. Every major US military contractor is similarly engaged with technology
transfers to Russia. I think Russia wants to make sure these high tech modifications reach initial deployment
within their arsenals before they strike. While technology development is always ongoing, and the Russians
can’t wait forever, they must at least ensure numerical superiority and technical comparability to the US. The
Russians have long ago accomplished the former and we are busy helping them achieve the latter. In contrast,
the upcoming deep recession scheduled to descend upon the Bush presidency will all but halt the modernization
of US weaponry (except black budget weapons, which likely are not being developed to defend America).

Third, Russia will not strike until her people are sufficiently antagonistic to the West to form a wall of public
opinion supportive of a nuclear first strike, initiating WWIII. US and NATO globalist leaders are helping
Russia achieve this by establishing NATO as a force for aggression and intervention rather than defense. That
was the real underlying reason why our globalist leaders fomented the war in Kosovo. The humanitarian excuse
was cover for other strategic intentions. It is also why the Clinton administration paid Harvard’s leftist
academics to sabotage "free-market" reforms in Russia. If the US government had been serious about
facilitating Russian reforms, they would have hired the libertarian CATO Institute instead. Ten years ago, the
Russian people admired America and longed to be like the West. There is now a deep sense of resentment
among Russians for repeated humiliation in Europe, coupled with widespread bitterness and cynicism about
economic freedom. The reforms are going nowhere and many Russians long for the return of the meager but
stable flow of supplies they got under the stifling, but predictable Soviet system. Russians are tired of seeing
fellow Slavs and other allies (such as Iraq) pushed around by NATO in the Middle East, Kosovo, Serbia and
Bosnia. America is hated by many and commonly distrusted--for good reason. They long to see Russia return to
her pre-Cold War glory as a world power. Putin, instead of being viewed as the ruthless second level
Communist hatchet man that he is, is ascending to the status of national hero.

Fourth, Russia needs to further secure its back door with China. Russia would not dare attack the West without
assurances of Chinese assistance on the Eastern front. A new "non-aggression" pact (reminiscent of the Hitler-
Stalin non-aggression pact that helped facilitate WWII) is in force between China and Russia. However, China
is not sufficiently strong militarily to handle its side of the bargain. Thus, Russia is busy helping the Chinese to
build up sufficient military forces, especially naval and missile forces, to conquer and control all of the Pacific
Rim during the opening months of WWIII. But there is a downside to this strategy which Russia cannot dismiss
lightly. Russia knows that China is a predator nation like itself, and will ultimately challenge Russian
hegemony when strong enough to do so. Thus, Russia must strike the West when China is minimally armed but
before China gets so strong as to present a direct threat to Russia. For this reason, the current military
technological transfers from the US to China worry the Russians--as they should.

Fifth, The Russians and the Chinese are rabid about the potential threat a US anti-ballistic missile (ABM)
system presents. This is not simply a cover, in my opinion. It is the foremost topic of heated discussions in
every political forum the Russians or Chinese engage in, whether in public or in secret, with the US or with its
allies. Clearly a viable ABM system threatens Russia’s potential to pull off a successful nuclear first strike.
Russia suspects that the US ABM system will consist of not a mere 100 interceptors, as claimed, but thousands
instead. This ABM issue is a major key to understanding the Russian perception of timing. The US ABM
system is still in the development stage, and is not scheduled for deployment till 2005 at the earliest and, more
probably, 2007. If the Russian strike were imminent, they wouldn’t be so worried about a future ABM system.
Since they are concerned in the extreme, I can only presume that deployment of such a system in the latter half
of this decade directly impinges upon their time of attack. I believe they intend to strike before the ABM
system is deployed. The strike could be accelerated if the Bush administration actively pursues its option of
converting the ship-based Aegis missile system. Ship-based ABMs could be deployed around the world and
target Russian or Chinese missiles in their upward trajectory where they can be destroyed prior to disgorging
their load of missile evading warheads and decoys. Precisely because such a system would be so effective, (7 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

faster to reach deployment, and cheaper, I’m convinced it will meet with maximum world hysteria and
resistance--especially from Moscow’s lackeys in the "peace" movements of Europe.


The US intelligence community (under both Republican and Democratic administrations) has known all these
facts for years and yet continues to actively cover for the Russians. No information about the coming Russian
threat is allowed to reach the American people. Furthermore, the US has taken every opportunity to encourage
Russia in its hostile intentions. For example, to reassure the Russians concerning the fearsome ABM issue, the
Clinton administration had agreed, in exchange for scrapping the ABM treaty, to impose technical limitations
on the speed of anti-missile interceptors (the "Demarcation Agreement") so that no US interceptor would be
effective against a Soviet ICBM. But this is more smoke and mirrors. In fact, the US has already been operating
on an even wider range of technical limits ever since the 1970s. Worse, the new proposed replacement treaty
would include the same provisions under the guise of new strategic arms limitations. I will attempt to explain
this appearantly suicidal behavior on the part of the US in the section on Western globalist strategy.


China and Russia both share numerous inherent characteristics that lend themselves to becoming predator

A large population base of poorly educated people deprived of much open contact with the West, which
can be manipulated through propaganda and can form the basis of huge armies.

A long history of authoritarian leadership rather than government based upon principles of fundamental

A discouraged and intimidated people used to being controlled and ordered about.

A certain brand of ruthlessness and insensitivity to conscience that tends to breed leaders and security
forces capable of unspeakable horrors.

This is not to say that all Russians or Chinese share these general characteristics--quite the contrary. However,
these characteristics predominate within these two societies more so than in societies that rarely become

China clearly has its sights set on world hegemony. The attitude of oriental superiority over occidental
bourgeoisie has long pervaded China and even predates Russian predatory tendencies. Realistic analysts who
have long experience with both Russia and China know that neither will long be subservient to the other. Russia
and China may attempt to use each other for short-term gain, but will eventually tangle for ultimate supremacy.

For the present, Russia and China are teaming up against the West in a new unilateral quest for arms. This is no
surprise. The Russians have been arming China, off and on, since the Chinese Communists came to power
under Chairman Mao. But now, the Chinese are playing both sides of the fence, East and West. Knowing that
Russia is willing to supply it with plentiful quantities of second-rate equipment, China is looking toward the (8 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

West for advanced American technology and funding in order to upgrade its Soviet and home-grown
equipment. At present the US globalist insides at the Pentagon cannot get away with arming China directly, but
both Republican and Democratic administrations in recent years have been successful at making it easy for
Chinese spies to pierce the US curtain of protection against espionage. It began in the George Bush Sr.
administration when the Chinese were given open access to key US defense plants like Hughes Aircraft, and
reached tidal wave proportions during the Clinton era. I am certain that US technology transfers will continue,
albeit more cautiously, during the new George W. Bush administration.


No nation on earth is building military power faster than China, but it has further to go, so it is not yet a threat.
However, it is an inevitable and formidable threatall the more so in light of the seeming futility of the task
facing China at present. In the end, the complacency of other nations regarding China will change into outright
terror as the world one day wakes up and finds itself facing a military monster of incredible size and ferocity.

The Chinese already have a formidable land based army of men, tanks and artillery. What it lacks is a world
class navy, air transport and missile force, coupled with a sophisticated communications and control system
sufficient to extend Chinese power worldwide. That’s no small task to accomplish. Russia is supplying large
quantities of equipment and the US is supplying much of the high-tech expertise. Naturally, China is harnessing
its billions in trade dollars supplied by naive American champions of free trade to build their forces. The
Chinese leaders are openly derisive of American Republicans who are convinced that peaceful trade will
moderate Communism. For the Chinese, war with the West is inevitable. It’s no longer a matter of if,but when!

I will now go into some detail on China’s weapons programs. While most people know about Russia’s military
power, few understand the growing Chinese threat. This information is for those who still harbor illusions about
Chinese impotency and docile intentions.

Since 1991 China has purchased at least $8.5 billion in weapons from Moscow, according to Russian
understated statistics. The actual figure is two to three times higher.

There are an estimated 10,000 Russian defense scientists and engineers working for China, on such
projects as naval shipbuilding, missile production, uranium-processing for nuclear weapons, aircraft
design and production, and nuclear missile submarines.

China just announced trials of the first of six type 094 Russian-designed and Chinese-built ballistic
missile submarines. The entire US will soon be at risk from Chinese medium range submarine
launched missiles. The sub’s Julang-2 or Dongfeng 31 type missiles, armed with 3 to 6 MIRVed
warheads, have a range of more than 5,000 miles.

Russia is shipping the new SS-27 (Topol-M ICBM) missile system to China. It will undoubtedly
become the Chinese nuclear first-strike weapon of choice. The Chinese designation will be Dong Feng
41 ("east wind") DF-41. The DF-41 will be armed with three Chinese nuclear warheads, most likely
designed with the help of stolen US nuclear designs from Los Alamos. Russia claims the SS-27 has
Maneuverable Re-entry Vehicle (MARV) capability designed to make it impossible for the current US
ABM system to complete an intercept.

Russia is selling the new Zvezda KH-31 anti-ship missile to the Chinese military. Remember, this was
the missile system financed by the US and upgraded with American technology--at the expense of (9 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

American defense jobs--when the Clinton administration insisted on buying this missile instead of the
superior US version to serve as a target drone for the US Navy.

China is in the midst of a large scale deployment of hundreds of CSS-5, CSS-6 and CSS-7 missiles,
with precision conventional warheads along the China coast opposite Taiwan. The number of missiles
indicates that China intends to neutralize Taiwan’s entire military structure in a pre-emptive strike--thus
negating Taiwan’s current technological advantage. The dumbed-down Patriot missiles provided by the
US to Taiwan are no match for this quantity and speed of missiles.

Like Russia, China is developing anti-satellite and Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) weapons to disrupt,
degrade or defeat the US command, control and surveillance systems.

The Russians have sold China several Sovremenny-class missile equipped destroyers. The supersonic
cruise missiles carried by these S-class destroyers surpass the current defense systems of the US Navy,
according to Jamestown Foundation’s Richard Fisher.

Russia has recently made available the S-300PMU (SA-10C Grumble) anti-aircraft missile to the
Chinese Army, who have deployed these weapons opposite Taiwan. The S-300PMU is a highly
effective and fast SAM (surface-to-air missile) that is difficult to jam or evade for Western aircraft.
Taiwan will be forced to sacrifice many hundreds of aircraft in order to eliminate this threat. The SA-
10C also has anti-missile capabilities, allowing the Chinese to field an effective missile shield against
US retaliatory strikes.

Chinese fighter aircraft are already being upgraded with the Russian built Vympel R-77 air-to-air
combat missile (NATO code named AA-12 Adder). The R-77 is designed to destroy other aircraft
beyond visual range and is comparable to the most advanced US missiles--the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Russia has also deployed the SS-N-22 Sunburn cruise missile to China. The Sunburn flies in excess of
1,500 miles per hour and can be armed with a nuclear warhead. The US navy has no effective defense
against a missile of this speed and manueverability. This is the same missile the Clinton adminstration
declined to buy from the Russians. Such a purchase would have allowed our military experts to develop
a proper counter attack.


The world is focusing on China’s ongoing and aggressive preparations to attack Taiwan, but I do not believe
this will happen until the start of WWIII or just prior to it. The greater portion of China’s strategic plan for
military development is heavily, if not totally, dependent upon an increasing flow of money and technology
transfers from the West, and the US in particular. An aggressive taking of Taiwan by force would make it
almost impossible for any US administration to justify business as usual. Globalist politicians would try, I’m
sure, but it would be a tough sell.

The Chinese have a knack for patience and are preparing for the long-term battle rather than settling for a short-
term advantage. It is my estimation that China will take Taiwan only after China’s preparations for the much
larger war is complete. China might even attack Taiwan prior to Russia’s pre-emptive attack on the US, in
order to use up US naval resources, place them on the map in a predictable location and divert the world’s
attention away from any last-minute Russian preparations. Ultimately, China intends to use Russia’s instigation (10 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

of WWIII to its full advantage. China will enter the war on Russia’s side and quickly conquer the far eastern
Pacific Rim of nations: Japan (payback time for the Japanese invasion of China prior to WWII), South Korea
(through its surrogate North Korea), the Philippines, Micronesia, Indonesia, Burma--a nation that is not yet
committed to either Russia or China. I’m not convinced China would take New Zealand or Australia, as such
action would limit its credibility when it switches allegiance from East to West during the war (as Russia did in
WWII). Clearly, if Russia’s attempt to conquer the West gets bogged down in a long protracted conventional
conflict, China will be tempted to attack Russia and finish it off. Historical precedent shows that the West can
be depended upon to come to the aid of even their natural enemies and be suckered into a promise of mutual


For the initial Russia/China alliance to be successful, the following plan of encirclement of the Western powers
will be necessary. For the past 50 years Russia has been building a circle of strategic alliances with the intent to
isolate the United States from sources of strategic materials during the coming war. Russia is now allowing
China to join in facilitating certain sectors of this encirclement. Many nations are partly in Russia’s camp and
partly in China’s. During the next war, we will see further separations and conflicts within these alliances, but
for now, most can be considered under the common Russia/China circle of influence. I will mention the
exceptions. Some of these nations are also playing as if they are allies of the West--an integral part of the
ongoing Russian and Chinese deception.

EASTERN EUROPE: Russia completely released control of some countries in Europe (Hungary, East
Germany, and Poland--although Russia still controls the major opposition in Poland), but has retained secret
control of and powerful alliances in Romania, Bulgaria, Belorussia, Ukraine, Slovakia, and the Baltic states.
Russia still has significant arms in several of these "former" Soviet states and is beginning to move more arms
into position surrounding NATO, taking advantage of existing secret underground facilities. North of Poland,
for example, Russia has moved in new stocks of nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad. Suspicious of Russian
intentions, Poland is demanding inspection rights. Russia has refused and predictably, the US is backing Russia
rather than Poland, downplaying and excusing the Russia’s moves. The Balkans are split between Russian
influence in Serbia, and Chinese influence in Albania, although NATO is allowed to think it is currently in the
driver’s seat elsewhere in the Balkans. Much of what Russia has structured in Eastern Europe is a Trojan horse
helping to gain access to NATO, compromise its secrets, and then change allegiances during the first weeks of
the coming conflict. Russia intends to use the initial turmoil after the nuclear strikes on the US and Britain to
quickly reposition its stocks of conventional forces from east of the Urals to the western borders of Byelorussia,
Ukraine, and Bulgaria.

AFRICA: The African continent is home to the second largest source of strategic minerals. Russia is the other
source, and it now controls both pools of minerals via its numerous client states in Africa: Angola,
Mozambique, Nigeria, the Congo, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Libya, and many others. Russia indirectly controls
almost all African governments by having established a dependency on Soviet-era military hardware--even
those that currently play as if they are in the UN’s sloppy orbit. None of the African states are capable of
governing themselves with stability anymore and thus are constantly susceptible to control or conquest. The
Sudan is the sole African nation so far drifting into the Chinese sphere of influence as China desperately seeks
to secure more exclusive contracts for oil--one of China’s biggest strategic weaknesses. The kingpin of the
Russia’s African strategy, however, focuses on southern Africa. South Africa’s ruling ANC Party has always
been a not-so-secret Communist Trojan horse in that country and will eventually turn over all of South Africa’s
resources and strategic geographical advantage to Russia. The horn of southern Africa is one of the world’s
strategic choke points.

FAR EAST ASIA: Although Russia has long had influence in North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and
other small island nations in the Far East, all are consider by default to be in China’s sphere of influence. That
influence will give way to direct conquest and control during the initial phases of the next war. (11 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

CENTRAL ASIA All of the oil-rich southern underbelly of Russia, from the Caspian Sea eastward to
Mongolia (Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Takzhikestan, etc.) is under the control of Russia through
puppet governments. However, the area is inherently unstable with porous borders. Anti-Russian sentiment is
high, contributing to my suspicion that Russia will not be able to hold on to these areas in the long term. They
will revert to semi-autonomous states controlled by various Muslim rivalries until brought under the yoke of the
next larger power to come along.

SOUTHERN ASIA Pakistan and India are both densely populated, socialist, economic disasters with nuclear
power capabilities, constantly threatening to annihilate each other over the issue of Kashmir. Pakistan is
currently aligned with China while India receives its arms from Russia. Ultimately, both are seeking for
armament self-sufficiency so as to be free from being pawns of these two international bullies. But, like the
Arab countries, the India-Pakistan people are destined to be used as cannon-fodder by other powers as long as
they refuse to unleash the economic potential of their masses, which can only happen through economic and
religious liberty. The US will lose what limited influence it has in the region when war comes. The entire area
from Pakistan to Burma will quickly come under Russian control, and then switch to China as Russia’s power
is depleted over the course of the war.

CARIBBEAN The Caribbean provides access to the soft underbelly of the United States and is another
strategic choke point for shipping to the US. Russia still maintains its control of Cuba (90 miles from Florida),
which serves as Russia’s eyes and ears on America. It maintains at least 1500 personnel at its Cuban listening
post at Lourdes. I suspect that Russia may still have some secret caches of weapons in the tunnel systems built
for Cuban military purposes, but Russia is beginning to play its China card by allowing the Chinese to be the
ones to introduce new weapon capabilities into the Americas. The pro-China lobby in recent US
administrations has sufficiently disarmed American fears such that Russia believes China can get away with
more intrusion in the Americas than Russia could. This is probably true. China, for its part, intends to use these
American surveillance and control points (Panama, Cuba, Venezuela, and the Bahamas) for her own hegemonic
purposes once Russia is defeated in the next war. China is currently working with Marxist Venezuela, Cuba,
and Panama to provide them with medium and short range missiles. US intelligence is downplaying these
overtures. Ultimately, I believe Mexico and Cuba will serve as the major access points of invasion by troops
into the southern US.

MIDDLE EAST: Russian client states in the Middle East include Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and a variety of
small Arab nations. Chinese technicians are also aiding several of these nations, but Russia is maintaining tight
control over the triggers of war. A portion of the recent CIA’s threat assessment regarding the Middle East is
accurate: "The proliferation of MRBMs [Medium Range Ballistic Missiles], driven largely, though not
exclusively, by North Korean Nodong sales, is altering strategic balances in the Middle East and Asia...the
missiles include Iran's Shahab-3, Pakistan's Ghauri and the Indian Agni-2....Making these weapons even more
worrisome is the fact that Russia, China and North Korea continue to proliferate chemical, biological and
nuclear technology, as well as long-range missile technology, which can dramatically increase the lethality of
the missiles." Clearly Israel is the target, but the longer range missiles will be used to deter interference by the
US or NATO. These missiles are intended to provide the Russian-backed Arab regimes a crucial advantage
over Israel’s conventional forces that they have heretofore not enjoyed. The missiles will also be used to
eliminate Israel’s nuclear weapons production and storage sites (what sites they can find). Iran and Egypt intend
to become self-sufficient in the production of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) but historically the
controlling powers have shown no desire to let this happen.


INTRODUCTION (12 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

The movement to establish a global system of control began somewhere back in the murky past of the
Illuminati (1776) and has since morphed, grown and expanded till now there are numerous shadowy variants
and groups that make it almost impossible to pin down exactly who is running things and where the real motive
and power is coming from. Fortunately, it is not necessary to know all of the secrets underlying this movement.
It is sufficient to establish that all of the existing globalist organizations--the Council on Foreign Relations,
Trilateral Commission, Aspen Institute, Bilderburgers, Royal Institute for International Affairs,
Committee of 300, Club of Rome, etc., aspire to global control and eliminate national sovereignty. Numerous
quotations of their own leaders and members state just that. That they have more sinister long-term motives and
intentions concerning the eventual use of global control is not so clear or easy to prove. However, the track
record of global intervention does not portend an optimistic outcome.

Those who watch the way global insiders operate and cover up illegal operations of influence and control
almost always come away convinced that there is some form of conspiracy involved. This conclusion is really
not too difficult to establish if one has access to the details of each case. Look at the specific evidence pointing
to government misdeeds and the subsequent cover-ups of economic manipulation, assassinations, terrorist
attacks on airlines, illegal weapons trade, government coups, and high level corruption. In each of these cases,
there is a common thread: the active involvement of a vast array of high officials, government agencies, the
media, law officers, lawyers, judges, and sometimes international corporations and organized crime--
coordinated and inter-connected enough to hide the truth, obstruct justice and cover for high level leaders.
That’s what a conspiracy is: a coordination between normally separable government officials who have no legal
right or lawful need to collude in their official capacities. Sadly, it happens all the time. The excuse given, when
discovered, that these unfortunate incidents are merely the workings of the proverbial "rogue agent" is rarely
true. Upon close examination, the trail leads always to higher levels where the cover-up and obstruction gets
serious. For further evidence, read the accounts of the many government whistle blowers out of the military,
CIA, DEA, or FBI, found in Rodney Stich’s Defrauding America (order line: 1-800-247-7389).


NWO globalists take great care to mask their intentions by appealing to "democracy" and making constant
references to "human rights" and the support of international law. But a close look at their justification for
intervention in Iraq, the Balkans and Indonesia clearly indicates that tyranny and ethnic cleansing was fostered,
then overlooked, or even partially falsified until it festered enough to justify intervention and subsequent
control. While most people in the Western world do not view the NWO as a predator movement, the Eastern
world certainly is beginning to see it in that light. I will make the case that the changing role of NATO and the
UN from a defensive organization to an aggressor in Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia, East Timor, and Africa was and still
is intentional, meant to help stir up hatred and discontent sufficient to justify an eventual Russian and Chinese
strike on the West as previously discussed.


The big question is always, why would those who strive for global power and financial control want to
engender a nuclear war that would destroy the whole world? In the first place, it is not true that the whole world
would be destroyed. Millions would die, and over half the people in any country under attack would get very
ill, but probably no more than 20% of the populace of any nation subjected to a military facilities first strike
would die. Most countries will not be targeted. Russia, who is planning this war, is sensible enough to be
prepared to shelter many of its citizens from nuclear effects. Among Western nations, however, only
Switzerland has a comprehensive fallout shelter program for its citizens. A few thousand savvy conservatives in
America also have provided shelter systems for their families. Nuclear war is quite survivable, outside of the
actual blast zones, with adequate preparations in place.

The core of the question about the prime motive remains: why destroy the tremendous prosperity that even (13 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

these conspirators for global power enjoy? Most people do not sufficiently understand real evil. To them, this
scenario is simply unimaginable. But the fact remains, powerful men in government and business have
knowingly colluded to finance war and destruction. It has happened before and it will happen again. For
example, globalists bankers, corporation heads and government officials colluded prior to WWII to finance
Hitler and Stalin, and undermine capitalist nations in order to pave the way for Socialism and war. A close look
at the conduct of the war relative to aid and concessions to Russia paint a picture of Western complicity to play
the Hegelian game, building up an enemy in order to produce a controlled response. The West actively
colluded in the betrayal of captive nations and paved the way for Soviet military dominance and conquest
around the world.

None of the World Wars in this century were accidents, in my opinion. Conflict was created with the long-term
goal to facilitate a consolidation of world power in the hands of the NWO elite. It is true that many of the Wall
Street bankers who financed Hitler and the Alfried Krupp-owned German war industries saw those
investments destroyed, but they were always taken care of after the war and allowed to make even greater
millions in the reconstruction process. That was much of the motive behind the Marshal Plan. German armorer
Alfried Krupp, who was convicted at the Nuremberg trials for using slave labor, was pardoned by John J.
McCloy, US Military Governor and High Commissioner in Germany. Mcloy was also the globalist insider who
eventually became head of the CFR. Clearly there was a system of immunity and protection established for
insider participants so that war could be used as an instrument of change, without destroying its own leaders
and the power behind them. In each case, there was a common motive--to use the horrors of war to accelerate
the demand for international institutions of control that would not otherwise be acceptable to free men and

To fully understand the globalist mode of operation, we must address one of the great inconsistencies in US
foreign policy: Why have US leaders (especially from Truman onward) actively undermined other pro-Western
governments and secretly armed and supported Communist guerrilla operations in such countries as China,
Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua, Laos, and Cambodia? Why do globalists attack some Communist regimes and support
others? The main reason is that globalists are dedicated socialists, in terms of commitment to control, but want
the benefits of a partially free market to finance that control system. They have a code name for this dualism--
the Third Way--which is a euphemism for the old Fabian socialism (private ownership but government
regulation and control). Naturally, globalists like the trappings of wealth that the capitalist component of a
controlled economy provides.

Communism has been a useful tool for the globalists to subvert liberty in the world. Communism takes the rap,
while the globalists steadily undermine world independence and national sovereignty. The NWO boys are
experts in the use of Hegelian tactics of creating enemies that produce a desired response. For example,
Communism is often characterized by certain excesses in tyranny that engender a call for global intervention--
very convenient. The Communists do the dirty work and the globalists step in to control the final outcome.
Often, the setup is not easy to control. When a Communist tyrant becomes unpredictable or messy the US State
Department has to go in and undermine their own tyrant and replace him with another. Ultimately, US global
leaders have to undermine any strongman, such as Milosovic in Serbia who refuses to become subservient to
NWO control. Globalists have a nasty record of not being able to find moderate tyrants, especially in Africa
and the Middle East.

The globalists’ first attempt to use war to create global government was WWI and the subsequent League of
Nations. It ended in failure--unless we take into account the one-sided Versailles Treaty of WWI which became
a catalyst for German hatred of the West, helping to foment the Second World War. WWII, in turn,
successfully delivered the world into the arms of the United Nations, but the global architects were unable to
create anything more than an international society of bickering social democrats, global guidance counselors
and Communist thugs. Thankfully, it had no enforcement powers. But that did not deter the UN’s ultimate
mission of undermining national sovereignty. While preaching peace through intervention, the UN has created
much mischief and genocide in the world which, in turn, has fomented predictable calls for change--including (14 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

the addition of enforcement powers to the globalist organization. But, the world isn’t buying into this trap yet,
so enforcement continues to be primarily a US responsibility, and additional crises must be created to alter the
world’s reluctance to submit to global authority.

During this post-WWII era (interspersed with periodic regional conflicts), the globalists have concentrated on
developing world economic interdependencies to justify adding additional financial and structural elements of
control. Their favored vehicle uses the popularity of "free-market" prosperity to rally support for regional
common markets which, in turn, demand the creation of regional and international control agencies promoting
"free trade." In the process, other goals are achieved like the increase of trade and aid to current tyrannies like
Russia and China, and the diminution of self-sufficiency in essential goods within each nation, making them
more vulnerable to shortages in future wars. People are also getting used to piecemeal sacrifices of sovereignty
in exchange for increased prosperity.

This slow-change, hide-the-real-effects process is meeting with increased resistance within the EU and the US
as the control elements of the World Court, IMF, WTO, NAFTA and GATT become more and more obvious
and the rigors of free trade cut into traditional socialist subsidies and high wages, especially in Europe. It is for
this reason, primarily, that the NWO globalists will resurrect war again as the final catalyst to catapult the
world over that final barrier of resistance. That is where we are headed, I believe.


The globalists know that they cannot induce the world to give up national sovereignty outright or grant
enforcement powers to the UN as long as the world is relatively at peace and the US is the dominant military
force in the world. All governments are chronically short of funds due to the demands of social welfare
programs. Why should they increase spending to support a UN army when the US will carry the load for them?
Thus, it is the destruction of America’s military, forcing the world to join and support a global military
that provides the prime motivation of US global leaders to induce the Russians to strike their own nation. This
alone explains the suicidal and unilateral disarmament the US has engaged in for the past 30 years. It explains
the rationale for covering up for Russia’s constant cheating on arms control agreements and treaties. It explains
why Bill Clinton would direct the US military to absorb a nuclear first strike (PDD-60) and NOT launch on
warning. It explains why the US would keep stalling year after year to make sure America is undefended
against a nuclear strike and that there are no provisions for civil defense shelters. It isn’t that US leaders are
stupid. They aren’t suicidal. They simply can’t get the world to take the final plunge into global control without
a war.


Clearly the NWO globalists do not intend to lose a war to the Russians, which brings up the next question: how
do the globalist plan to win a war with Russia when they allow Russia and China to launch a first strike and
destroy most of the US and British military machine at the very onset of hostilities? I do not think Europe will
be included in the first strike as Russia wants to preserve the economy of Europe by blackmailing it into
submission. Certainly Europe’s meager NATO forces would be incapable of taking on the Russians alone.

The amswer may lie in the fact that both Republican and Democratic administrations have been actively
favoring China’s acquisition of US military technology for the past 12 years. I suspect that the globalists have a
secret pact with China whereby China has agreed to betray Russia during the next war, in return for promises
of military technology transfers. China wins in three ways. It gets military aid from Russia before the war,
receives aid from the West before and during the war, and eliminates a major world predator (Russia) in the
prosecution of the war. The globalists of the 1930s had a similar secret pact with Russia. Russia’s temporary
"non-aggression" pact with Germany set Hitler loose on the world, and after the western front was secure,
Russia, with promises of allied aid, turned on Hitler and contributed to his defeat. By establishing a second (15 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

front at Hitler’s rear, the pressure on the Allies was sufficiently relieved to allow them to take the offensive.

In the coming war, I suspect China will play the same role and may even absorb the balance of Russia’s nuclear
weapon strikes. If the West has weapons strong enough to destroy Russia’s underground weapons factories in
the Ural Mountains, the war will turn conventional and Russia cannot win a conventional war with China’s
millions threatening its rear. I wouldn’t be surprised if during the course of the war, China will be allowed to
retain her conquests in the Far East, much as Stalin was promised control of Eastern Europe after the war.
When the war is over, the world will have a new cold war and a new enemy--China. As in WWII, this is
precisely what the NWO needs to justify maintaining international enforcement power in the hands of the UN.
War will also justify a whole range of control mechanisms over people and business life. We may never see
them completely lifted.


There is one major mistake in assumption that almost all people make who object to conspiracy--they assume
that everyone or nearly everyone contributing to the conspirator's agenda must know there is a conspiracy and
be privy to the whole agenda. This is not true, but conjuring up this assumption allows people to easily dismiss
conspiracy with the understanding that too many knowing people would make it impossible to keep the secret. I
certainly have never made a case for that all or even a many of the participants know the whole plan or even
substantial parts of it. Quite the contrary. All my writings have concentrated on explaining how and why top
level conspirators use masses of predictable leftists, yes-men, ambitious lackeys and partially knowing ladder-
climbers to do their bidding--specifically so as to limit the number who have "need to know" access. They
cement together the whole conglomerate with subtle and not so subtle threats--and occasionally carry them out.
Many are bought off with regular payments--like journalists and judges. Most know only parts of the puzzle.

However, almost everyone in high places does know there is "power structure" above them they dare not
challenge, they also know it isn't good for their job, advancement or health to "ask too many questions." Read
any number of the tales by federal whistleblowers to confirm this general fear. Thus, most participants
rationalize it all away as some benevolent control system, or believing that "whoever they are" must control the
world in order to have stability. Others, especially in the enforcement ranks, are just too corrupt to care. But the
bottom line is: very few know that the Powers That Be (PTB) intend to pull the nuclear trigger via Russia and
China. All the little steps leading up to weakening the US and building up Russia and China are covered by
liberal notions of "détente," "easing tensions," and "peace." These lesser officials who are tasked to defend
these lies tend to believe their own propaganda.

However, the ones at the very top, who do know how to use war to create Hegelian responses, are very very
evil--something most of the world doesn't really believe in anymore, and that is why many people can't
conceive of or believe in this horrible brand of conspiracy. But keep in mind what they did before in building
up Hitler, only to set him loose on Europe during WWII. The war created a justification for the UN and
facilitated the rise of a new enemy (Russia) in its aftermath. Remember Pearl Harbor--not because of the
infamy of Japan, but the infamy of Roosevelt and his leftist crew who induced Japan to attack and hid the
information from our own military in Hawaii. It happened before, so why should it be so hard to believe now?
We are reaching the culmination of what George Marshall and his cohorts planned by creating a cold war
enemy. Russia was allowed to rise and have hegemony over Europe in order to create the next war. The phony
demise of "Communism" is merely the final effort to lull the West into complacency before the strike. We are
about to see it descend upon the world.

In all of this, I'm certainly not discounting the military-industrial complex argument, but it doesn't explain why
people that are already fabulously wealthy and who control the reigns of power are still pushing the world
toward greater and greater global control. None of this will give them any more personal power or wealth. How
much can any single person use? The military industrial complex argument doesn’t explain the rush to suicide (16 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

and disarmament at an alarming rate. Some participants are blind, but surely some must suspect this is very
dangerous game and are going along in order to please some other very powerful people above them. But let
there be no doubt--the top echelon expects to survive this--why else have they built significant bunkers at US
taxpayer expense. Somebody knows something is coming. Also, war is not as futile a tactic as most conspiracy
debunkers assume. At least 2/3 of the world will survive this even without preparations, and virtually all the
high level people who know that war is coming have made preparations to survive it.

My friend Jeff Nyquist and many others do not believe in conspiracy--at least on a broad scale. They try to
explain things in terms of mistakes, blunders and attempts to cover for those blunders. The basic problem I
have with Nyquist's reliance on standard psychological and sociological models is that it breaks down with the
more specific information I have about the detailed actions of those involved in the government's undermining
of our national interests--in exchange for global and leftist interests. I've never met an honest conspiracy
debunker yet who has really read all the literature of the defectors from the CIA and other black agencies. Of
course, virtually none of the defectors themselves sees the big picture either--but the evidence is clear that the
whistleblowers all knew that the higher ups directly conspired to keep them silent. We have to look at the long
historical trend of conformity to leftist ideology in these cover ups to perceive the unified purpose behind these
actions. Few witnesses immersed in the details of a whistleblower’s tragic battles with government have the
talent to see the correlation and pattern of action that point to a coordinated plan of attack on liberty and
national sovereignty. It’s too easy to focus on the specific injustice.

For example, the excuse that the betrayal of US security interests by CIA or State Department officials is a
cover-up for past mistakes is a weak conclusion. Certainly, mistakes happen, no matter how much power the
PTB have. But covering for blunders alone does not explain why high government officials keep making NEW
MISTAKES in the same consistent direction (leftward) and why there are more and more NEW EFFORTS to
cover for NEW threats from the Russians and Chinese . Why is it that we never see any official learn from the
blunders of the past? Why is it that the betrayals keep accelerating and getting broader? The more diverse the
agencies involved and the more people that are brought into the net of betrayal, the less possible it is that they
are all acting only to cover for mistakes. There has to be some other explanation that keeps generation after
generation of government officials moving toward a single direction.

Cover-ups are what I consider my best evidence for conspiracy--simply because of the interconnectedness
between disconnected officials and agencies that happens in a conspiracy. But now Nyquist comes along and,
while admitting that cover ups exist, claims that there is no plan behind them--that it is only normal sociological
motives of rogue individuals. I don't buy it--mainly because of the many many years this has been going on,
and the fact that it has always had a powerful continuum of hostility toward the interests of liberty. If it were
people covering for people, the process would clear itself from time to time or even reverse directions. It would
be more random. But it isn’t random. It shows all too much disturbing evidence of continual forward
movement--purposeful movement, in my opinion.


This strategy is wholly dependent upon shielding Americans and Europeans from Russian and Chinese
intentions. Keeping people ignorant and naive also allows these same globalist leaders to claim that they didn’t
know of Russian and Chinese intentions. We must not let them get away with this, lest they claim the right to
lead America into the war for global control. If you doubt what I say, check your feelings to see if you at least
can sense that the Russians and Chinese are lying about their pretensions of peace. If you trust our government,
remember Pearl Harbor. The evidence is now fully proven that Roosevelt induced Japan to attack in much the
same way our own government now is helping to induce a Russian attack in the future. Only this time the
results will be deadly to many more Americans. Every one of you reading this is at risk, so do not take lightly (17 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56 Analysis of Strategic Threats

what I say. If the general reasoning I have presented is compelling, help warn others. Feel free to distribute this
analysis. The more people that know of this grand deception, the less success globalist leaders will have in
escaping blame.

In any case, the least you can do is prepare to survive the next war. If I’m right on timing we still have a few
years to prepare. If J R Nyquist’s timing is right, you don’t have any time to spare, so do something
constructive sooner rather than later. My website has several sources that can help you keep track of the
progress of these threats and prepare against them.

Thanks for listening.

Joel Skousen, Editor World Affairs Brief (18 of 18)23-12-2004 05:21:56