Interview of defected KGB agent, Yuri Bezmenov, by G.E. Griffin. An older interview, but very appropo for today. How far have we gone down this road, and is it too late to turn back? http://miatoday.com/DemoralizationDestabilizationInsurgencyNormalization.asp
Interesting interview... particularly this part:
"That’s why my KGB instructors specifically made a point, never bother with Leftists. Forget about these political prostitutes. Aim higher. This was my instruction. Try to get into, into wide circulation, established CONSERVATIVE media..."
LOL!
Read the post again... ACCORDING TO BEZMENOV, THE "DEMORALIZATION PHASE" WAS ALREADY COMPLETED BY 1985, THE YEAR THE INTERVIEW HAPPENED! IN FACT ACCORDING TO HIM IT HAD BEEN GOING ON FOR 35 YEARS!
He goes on to further state that the next phase, "Destablization", only takes two to five years, followed by the "Crisis" phase in as little as six weeks, causing a "violent change of power, structure and economy."
Let's see; 1985... add five years for the destabilization phase, another six weeks for the crisis phase... so we're somewhere between 1990 and 1991. Excuse me, but did I sleep through the coup? How come the leftists haven't been lined up and murdered by our Marxist/Leninist leaders?
You ask, "How far have we gone down this road?"... The answer is not very; we took the fork in that road four years after this guy gave his interview, when in 1989 the Berlin Wall came down. This guy was a product of the Cold War, his interview occured during the Cold War, his philosophies and politics are from the Cold War, and are of interest strictly from a historical point of view.
Do a google search on this guy and you'll see that EVERY whacko neo-con website falls all over each other to quote him and reference his interview. That alone should tell you his worth.
Read it again eddie....several times. Obviously, the first time wasn't enough for you. The demoralization phase...go to any college/university campus, and tell me it doesn't exist. Go to any major U.S. city, look around and tell me it doesn't exist. Watch the evening news, and tell me there are not lies and half truths being presented as legitimate news. Bezmenov doesn't say, "Okay, that phase is complete, the next one starts Monday morning. It is ongoing, subversive, and overt. How many today basically 'live off' of the government with grants, handouts, welfare, food stamps, etc.? In England, it's called, 'being on the dole'. Here, for many, it is a multi-generational lifestyle. They have been demoralized.
No doubt jersey...Eddie is ''well educated'' BY HIS OWN WORDS (lol) he is an example of this artricle, A DUMB, EDUCATED, ''usefull idiot''- LEFTY...
Look at the way he handles topics his mind cant handle,grasp or believe, he acts, LIKE THEY TAUGHT HIM TO, LIKE A REAL JACKASS, or ''usefull idiot''..IMHO
-- Modified on 11/21/2009 6:27:25 PM
WTF???? Since you don't address anything I posted in my reply, Just WHAT THE FUCK are you saying besides using your tired diatribe of "LEfTY"???? Can you even define what you mean by that?
Your post makes no sense, which is typical of ALL of your posts.... vacuous shots at anyone who doesn't cowtow to your belief system.
Specifics, specifics, specifics... Do you even understand the concept????????
Stick to what you do best (I assume), sucking cocks; and leave the REAL thinking to those who have a clue.
she's off her meds. again.
-- Modified on 11/21/2009 7:16:57 PM
i'm tninking maybe she doesn't do the going down thing very well, as she's lots of time on her hands to post here?
You're sooo lame, most people dont click on your posts...But you think you should hop on the puppy pound band wagon, wityh fasteddie, and say something about me, EVEN THOUGH I NEVER TALK TO YOU...WTF???
Who has no life?? I may post here alot, but I ASSURE YOU, I ''go down'' alot, enough to be a pro...ITS A DIGITAL WORLD ASSHOLE, dont have to be home, on a big ol PC anymore to stay connected..You lames ass Jew hater
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 12:22:03 AM
tj :remember all those PMs we shared?
You ought too : I was nice to you, which makes me a rarity in this forum.
I have 2 reviews from people I chat with up here..k? THAT ARE SOOOOO SWEET, and donated to my favorite charity, JUST TO SEE ME...You may not like me, BUT SOME OF YOU LOVE ME...Youre not a rarity of this board, but rather a sheep, following another sheep (eddie's)lead...Now you jump on some insulting post of eddies, making insults at me, after all our aweet emails??? sounds like youre REAL phooney...lololol
PS- Not to mention the guys THAT DONT write reviews Ive seen from guys, WHO LOVE READING MY POSTS, agree with my views, AND THINK IM FUNNY..I'm actually getting A NEW kinda love for alot of ya'll AND TER!! You'd think my views would hurt my business, especially cause your a lefty, and our views are sooooo different and our country is soooo polarized, I actually think, AND KNOW, it helps, and their are ALOT of people who feel like me..and the seek me out because of it...Thankgawd, their are enough of the people who feel like me, or very similiar with an insaitiable appitite for some Talula aka Ms Jones (if your nasty)..Or my money would get fucked up, cause I like talkin politics and talking it, in a community where I am a provider,I know it could hurt me, BUT IT DOESNT..
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 3:39:54 AM
XiaomingLover1
"i'm tninking maybe she doesn't do the going down thing very well, as she's lots of time on her hands to post here?"
ROFLMAO...I checked out your review page ...Couldn't get past the performance
scores...
I'm thinking it looks like none of them go down very well,on you,XiaomingLover1..A average on 6 on performance!!!!,Maybe you need some Talula lessons?? lol
QUAD, you still show up in my dreams 
xoxo, I hope you still love my long legs and ass That begs to be kissed -xoxo
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 3:35:21 PM
I did read it again... and again, and again. I suggest you do the same. Fill me in again with your "college/university" smoke screen and then return to your original post... 1985... 15 to 20 years... WHERE'S the coup? Where's the "REVOLUTION"?
Stop avioding the questions I raised in my reply. You posted, I responded, and you've totally side-stepped the questions I raised. Answer them, and then I'll respnd to these NEW aspects you've suggested.
It always makes me smile when conservatives raiser a point, a liberal respnds, and then the conservative shifts the ORIGINAL point without answering the original question HE himself raised...
In magic, we call it smoke and mirrors...
Neither side has a monopoly on "smoke and mirrors".
gg, isnt it crazy, how republicans HAVE NO POWER, but liberals, STILL BLAME THEM FOR EVERYTHING...
Eddie the republicans arent doing this, THIS IS ALL THE LEFT...When will you get it?? YOU LIBERALs HAVE A SUPER-MAJORITY EVERYWHERE...And as sure as you repeat EVERYTHING you hear, you're repeating what you hear on your corporate sponsered news, WHERE YOU HEAR THEM BLAMING REPUBLICANS!!!! But all you have to do, is look at the facts, WHICH YOU WONT DO, and see, this is not the republicans, as they have no power to do anything!!!! Just like the article said, NO FACTS CAN CHANGE YOUR MIND, like you have a mental dissorder/brainwashed...NOTHING, NO FACTS WILL CHANGE YOUR MIND,not even when what you see with your own 2 eyes doesnt match the truth, THEY (THE NEWS)will just LEAD YOUR SHEEPISH ASS INTO BELIEVEING, what ever they want. Then the funny part, is how you ''think'' you're sooooo smart and open minded, when really you're a sheep..and you're soooo closed minded you act like a child when topics are brought up, they (the news) told you arent true, so you dont believe them, NOT EVEN IF THEY'RE ARE FACTS SUPPORTING THE ISSUE'S YOU DONT BELEIEVE IN, caiuse they told you not to believe, you dont, AND WONT!!!
ps..Now Im NOT SAYI9NG REPUBLICANS HAVENT DONE THIS SAME SHIT, they're just not doing it now, AND IM NOT REPUBLICAN BECAUSE OF THE SAME GAMES THEY PLAYED WHEN THEY HAD POWER, Im independent..You, you will stay a liberal in support, of the ''democratic communism'' without being bright enough to change your affiliation, cause they pulled the wool over your eyes..Which neither republican nor democrat has the power to do to me, THEY ARE ALL WRONG, but right now its the Liberals being greedy capitalistic pigs that hate freedom, liberty and free entertprise, AND YOU LOVE THEM, AND BLAME THE REPUBLICANS FOR HOW THEY ACT Silly wabbit....
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 1:40:52 AM
It just doesn't amuse me when liberals do it! 
hung on the 15 to 20 years statement, when, if you read a little further, he says that is the 'minimum' number of years required to educate a generation.
College/university...read,"Your leftists in the United States, all these professors and all these beautiful civil rights defenders, they are instrumental in the process of subversion, only to destabilize the nation."
Coup/revolution...don't see those words in there anywhere concerning the United States, or any other for that matter.
Couple of statements that stand out to me are, "As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell him nothing."
And, "This is what will happen in the United States if you allow all these schmucks to promise all the goodies and paradise on earth to destabilize your economy, to eliminate the principle of free market competition, and to put a big brother government in Washington, D.C. with benevolent dictators like Walter Mondale who will promise lots of things, never mind if they are fulfilled or not." The 'Walter Mondale' is dated, but you can substitute just about any current democrat politician in his place. Obama, for instance.
I don't smoke, don't know any magic tricks, but I can look in the mirror every morning.....and smile at that handsome face.
Im always posting some shit he doesnt believe in, AND HE NEVER, has the facts, or laws or treaty's I provided in my links, OR ANY FACTS, then try's to debate...Its part of eddie's intellectual retardation...Then not only will HE NOT READ THE LINKS, he doesnt seem to show much reading comprehension, on the few sentences he does read, before he reads a line he believes to not be true, in his little liberal shaped mind, AND STOPS READING ABOUT IT, and uses that one line, as his debate!!!
The thing about facts eddie, IS YOU DONT KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THEM, and youre soooo closed minded, you wont, ever...EVEN WHEN THE FACTS BEING PROVIDED, such as Jersey's, ARE OBVIOUSLY TRUE!!! Like its sooo obvious, MOST PEOPLE SEE IT HAPPENING, but not you eddie, you dont believe the truth happening INFRONT OF YOUR FACE, even when facts back it up, IF YOU WERE TOLD NOT TO...
but I understand them, and have enough intelligence to decide which to believe and which not to believe. Just because a website agrees with my own personal views doesn't mean I take it at face value. Some things have to be taken with a grain of salt and further investigated.
Bezmenov’s timing was off and the end game hasn’t occurred. Well then what really happened? The Soviets, that presumably were watching and hoping and prodding for this end game to unfold and “sneak” up on US, never saw their own demise sneak up on themselves (as you acknowledged). They disappeared, (thanks to Reagan, Thatcher, The Pope, Walesa, etal), much to the disappointment and sorrow of many of those useful idiots referred to by Bezmenov. Had Mondale beat Reagan, the Soviet Union would still exist.
We took them out before they got us. Their demise shook up the “Idiots” a little. That does not indicate at all that they don’t exist. Quite the contrary. They are alive and well in many of our institutions. Ask BizarroSuperDude for a better explanation of the situation in colleges and universities. Hell, there’s “useful idiots” hanging out right here on P&R.
You proclaim Bezmenov’s points to be wrong (or at least moot) essentially because his timing was off and the end game never occurred. You further discredit him because he’s quoted by some on the right? What? You’re expecting the “Useful Idiots” to take up his cause? LOL
There are a lot of "useful idiots" in all walks of life, and they come from both sides of the aisle. That doesn't mean that they are or were part of some grand Soviet scheme to demoralize America.
Remember the passage I quoted about going after the consevative media, and if you want to find someone who's trying to demoralize America look no further than Beck, Limbaugh, et. al. who constantly tell us that we no longer have control of our own country. Then watch the videos I linked to with the conversation between Jon Stewart and Lou Dobbs... As Stewart observed, this country is not fragile.
Also, one has to consider the source... read XiaomingLover's reply further down this thread and see the context and the possible motivations of the interviewer which could very well bring into question the veracity of the entire interview.
Grand conspiricy theories have a great appeal to those who poorly informed about complex subjects or not intelligent enough to grasp the enormous variable that effect them.
"Everybody does it." LOL
I wasn't laying out any conviction in or buying into any sort of conspiracy or even any sort of plot on the part of the U.S.S.R. Surely you noticed I characterized their part as “watching and hoping and prodding.” That’s not some sort of full frontal attack, even as subterfuge goes.
No, I took this more as some commie turned capitalist making an observation that was probably quite apparent to many in the KGB and Politburo at the time. They got all sorts of things wrong but that doesn’t mean they got everything wrong. But I have observed that you do commonly throw the baby out with the bath water after discovering what you perceive to be one mistake or a connection to or interest from the “wrong” type of person.
Not sure I get the reference to "everybody else does it"... in fact I rant about people doing that all of the time.
In fact, I'm not sure I get your whole point. I'm not denying that the interview took place or that it's not presented as was given; I'm not discounting that some of his observations could be applied to American society today... but I certainly don't think that it was caused by any KGB or soviet plan as he suggests.
To me, the turning point was Nixon and Watergate. I believe that is when citizens began losing faith in their government and our leaders. And it's been downhill ever since...
With the exception of Carter and George H.W.Bush, EVERY president since then has had some kind of scandal attached to their administrations. Reagan had Iran Contra, Clinton had the Lewinski affair, etc.
I keep going back to the Lou Dobbs conversation with Jon Stewart... I'm not a big fan of Dobbs, btw, but he observed that beginning with Bush and continuing with Obama, our leaders have tended to ignore the "will of the people" and do whatever they've felt like doing.
So since Nixon, we've had scandals, poor judgement and outright ignoring of the public... No wonder we're demoralized!
At least you’re off the idea that somehow I claimed that the Soviets were somehow responsible for the demoralization.
You’re correct about Nixon and politics. He did more damage than Johnson but it was Johnson that first lost the faith of those baby boomers against the Vietnam war. They were the ones the Soviet spoke about. Nixon soured the rest of us.
ALL GOVTS ARE GUILTY OF IT, this is a fact!! You cant be confronted with, and except, logically, for OBVIOUS REASONS, govt bennifits from social engineering..Come on.. I THINK YOU'RE THE ''USEFUL IDIOT'' in the article..
It doesnt have to be part of a CONSPIRACY, to be true eddie..
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 2:52:34 PM
Do you realize that there is a contradiction between
:The Soviets, that presumably were watching and hoping and prodding for this end game to unfold and “sneak” up on US, never saw their own demise sneak up on themselves..."
and
"We took them out before they got us"
So, which one was it? Were the commies caught napping with their pants down, or did we get them before they got us? How is it that the wily Soviet commies could be so inattentive to their superpower adversary - the USA - that they would allow their own demise to sneak up on them? And presumably, since we took them out, we were the ones sneaking up on them?
It just doesn't make sense, But i'm aware who i'm dealing with. LMAO.
So, how many years have to pass, with the US perhaps bloodied but still unbowed, until you are willing to admit Bezmenov was peddling a pile of steaming poop to political scatologist, and that our ex-commie defector was either making it up as he went along or never had a real clue to begin with, and was always talking through his astrakhan?
It's hard for some to understand, harder till for some to admit, but the historicl demise of the USSR was a result of it's own internal problems and the slow and spotty success of containment, a bipartisan policy followed by every US administration since 1947. No, you perfer to belive that Thatcher and Reagan are the heroes. And that all of the internal probs of the USSR would have been overcome if only hapless Fritz Mondale had become POTUS. LMAO. Time to come out of your vintage fallout shelter, circa 1961. You're not really Brendan Fraser, are you?
Sic transic gloria, my rightward-listing friend. Every country is eventually going to become enfeebled and ireelevant and decline and eventually pass into history. And the USA is no exception to this.
Irrelevance, now's there's a topic about which you ought to be an expert. Pretty much every one of your stunning contributions in this forum is a monument to irrelevance. so, do you aspire to be the Sir Christopher Wren of TER's PNR?
Fret not, though; in all instances your posts continue to be excellently typed and meet and exceed all expectations for neatness. A pity they so rarely say anything of importance. Or even interest.
everyone gets shot in the Mexican stand off. Sometimes just one. (or was it closer to circular firing squad?)
I didn't bother reading past your first paragraph.
there be a contradiction between getting shot in a Mexican standof and being unaware and unatentive to the causes which ultimately cause your demise.
So, which one was it, ned? I don't think Reagan, Thatcher, Walesa and Pope JP II were Mexicans.
your Jewish mother?
really, were you even within a light year of a point with that one, or just another excuse to parade your tedious ignorance and insatiable desire to get in the last word?
And you have the balls to chide me about how i can do better re goofing on Sarah Palin? Double LMAO. Do you think you were covering yourself in Pulitzer Prize quality commentary with that one?
I'll never take you seriously again. Though it's been quite a while since I last took you seriously.
So, as you burrow further and deeper underground, do your tender feelings become even more sensitive? Rightwing.Panties.In.A.Twist?
"yo' momma!" really, how stupidly desperate can you get? an, I'm sure you'll give a great example soon enough, or, with your newfound identity as RightwingFromTheHood, soon enuf' LMAO
Keep up this piss-poor pathetic level of discourse, and you will have to be relieved of your Honorary Homeboy Card.
is that Reaganites claim that everything GOOD that happened on Reagan's watch was his doing, but everything BAD that happened on Reagan's watch was caused by previous administrations.
The fall of the Soviet Union wasn't accomplished by Reagan in eight years. It was caused by many, many things, not least among them their desperate need to "keep up" with us in the arms race. Reagan's "Star Wars" defense shield was part of it, but by no means the sole cause of their fall. Yet the conservatives canonized Reagan, naming buildings, roads and airports after him left and right. What a farce!
Just where did I single out Reagan to give him ALL the credit? I didn’t.
Before the 80’s what happened? Truman and Eisenhower at best only kept the Soviets at bay while the USSR solidified and Communism spread. Remember the Hungarian revolution in '56? It was under also under Eisenhower that Castro took over Cuba. Remember when was the Berlin wall built, 1961? Remember the Soviet tanks rolling into Czechoslovakia in the summer of '68. WWIII damn near DID happen under JFK.
The whole Iran-Contra affair was an out growth of the Democrat controlled Congress attempting to pacify and even promote the Communists of Central America. The first choice of Democrats at nearly every turn was to not do anything that might upset the Soviets. Mondale would have probably authored the very first bailout plan, of the Soviet Union claiming they were too big to fail.
Don’t even try to give the liberals of this country any credit towards the fall of Communism.
Maybe you misfollowed the thread, but my reply was to XiaomingLover... I didn't single you out as crediting Reagan for the fall of the Soviet Union... I was referring to Reaganites in general.
Regarding your references to the past; what are you implying? That a conservative president would have prevented any of your above stated occurances? That a republican president would have stopped Castro or the invasion of Czechoslovakia? Nice theory, even if you can't back it up.
Liberals/democrats spent just as much money on the arms race as the cons/GOP did, and THAT was the major reason the Soviet Union failed. They just couldn't keep up. It just happened to fall during Reagan's watch. Liberals controlled congress when Reagan was president, when Nixon was president, and in fact for over 40 years before Gingrich's "contract with America". They had every bit as much to do with the fall of the Soviet Union as any conservative did.
Charlie Wilson, a DEMOCRAT from Texas, almost single-handedly caused the Soviet Union to fail in Afghanistan and cost them hundreds of billions of dollars...
Kennedy and Johnson, unfortunately to their discredit, escalated the conflict in Viet Nam, causing the Soviet Union to spend an enormous amount of time and money. Both Kennedy and Johnson had strong anti-communist policies...
JFK was a staunch anti-communist; his father Joe, again to his discredit, was a good friend and supporter of Joe McCarthy...
To say that "liberals" had nothing to do with the fall of the Soviet Union is absolutely ridiculous!
To blame Iran-Contra on a democratic congress is patently absurd. While congress chose to distance themselves from the Contras by withdrawing all OVERT support, the Contras were funded COVERTLY by the CIA in conjunction with the Military Junta of Argentina. The "arms for hostages" idea came totally from the Reagan administration and had little of nothing to do with congress...
One thing I can speculate on with confidence... if we had a conservative in office during the Cuban Missle Crisis, there's a good chance that none of us would be here today to have these discussions... a good portion of this country would still be radioactive. They received two mixed messages from the Soviets and chose to ignore the one that would have led to war, essentially acting as if they never received it. DIPLOMACY in action... and an intelligent reaction rather than a knee-jerk hawkish response. By making Kruschev blink first, Kennedy embarrassed the Soviets and had a lot to do with Kruschev being ousted as the Soviet Premier.
Most conservatives today think that diplomacy is a dirty word and at best a sign of weakness. After 9/11 we had the world on our side, and Bush pissed away all of that good will with his arogance and "don't fuck with us" attitude.
Say what you want about Clinton and his blowjob, he went a long way to re-establishing diplomatic ties to much of the world, had the trust of the majority of Americans (and dispite his impeachment would probably have been re-elected in a landslide if ther were no term limits) and left office with a three trillion dollar surplus, low unemployment, a healthy economy and a country that was much less "demoralized" than it is today. I know that drives conservatives crazy, but so be it.
Charlie Wilson was no liberal. Hell, JFK was not a liberal by today's standards (his brother Bobbie is another story). Who do you think started the tax cutting scourge? I'm not sure JFK would even be a Democrat today.
Yes, Democrats played a near equal role against the Soviet Union during the 50's and 60's, even during the 70's the Democrat Hawks did many things right. For as badly as Vietnam turned out, it did accomplish one thing. It kept the Communists occupied for a while.
But then came the 80's. I did NOT blame Iran-Contra directly on the Liberal Congress. But if they had not laid down for the Central American Communists, it wouldn't have all happened in the first place. You did not refute one thing I said about the appeasers of the late 70's and 80's. They all thought Reagan was going to push the "Red Button" and start WWIII. They did everything they could to hinder his efforts. Thankfully there were still enough Democrats with back bones remaining in Congress to keep the far left liberals from gaining control. Not so today, unfortunately. Just when we had the Soviets on the ropes, if not for Reagan, it could have gone another direction. Had Mondale won he would NEVER have continued the efforts to bury them. Quite the opposite. And that's speculation that CAN be backed up.
BTW, the Soviet Union actually took it's final gasp under the watch of GHWB not Reagan.
Double BTW. It's OK for YOU to speculate about a conservative stand in for JFK during the missile crisis but you shoot down the same conversation about Castro's take over, even though you got your facts wrong which leads us to. . .
A Triple BTW. A Republican WAS in office during the Communist take over of Cuba.
What's with the change of subjects to post U.S.S.R topics?
but it was late and I didn't feel like correcting it.
The sad thing is that I have to agree with you that the Democrats are wimps... at least the republicans when they were in power basically said "fuck you" and did exactly what they said they were going to do... it was wrong, but at least they had the conviction to do it.
Today, even though it's a cliche, we given the choice between the lesser of two evils; I hst happen to think that it's the dems where you think it's the cons. But neither one of us are happy with who we have to choose from. Hey, maybe we are demorailized...
wow, holy timewarp, Batman! for a few minutes i was wisked back to the 1950s and hearing the profundities of Whitaker Chambers, Herbert Philbrick, Elizabeth Bentley, Senator McCarthy and Senator McCarran and a slew of others, which as an infant i had the great misfortune to miss.
Really jf, this interview, if we can call it that, is an interesting historical and cultural artifact, but as guide for analyzing current problems and perhaps pointing to a way out of our slow national collapse, I'd say it's Rube Goldbergesque at best. I wouldn't depend upon it for much except for a few cheap laffs.
Now i'm wondering, can it be a coincidence that the interviewer never asked for a specific name of guys slated for elimination in the US? If libel/slander was a worry, why not ask for the names of hte guys outside the US, in India for example, slated for elimination? If these guys are slated for death, it seems as if the decent thing to do would be to warn them. Can it be that most or all of this is fabulism at its fabulous best. Or is Bezmenov telling a tale most ardently desired by his interviewer?
Taking at face value the KGB's penchant for subversion and propaganda and active measures and the like, how can we be sure that Bezmenov was not in fact a fake defector, and this interview itself is part of some really not-at-all-obvious attempt at media manipulation? Soviet media manipulation could have had nothingat all to do with the problems cited by Bezmenov, but would it be in Bezmenov's interedt to cop to that if that in fact was the case? I suspect it would not be in his interest. It'a a lot easier to preach to the converted and the true believers than it is to convert the non-believers and the skeptics. So....
Another thought: remember when it was revealed that a bunch of CIA misinformation and disinformation, re Soviet foreign policy goals and the support of terrorist activities, was spread in various foreign media outlets over a period of years, and later, Claire Sterling would cite some of those that same mis/disinformation in "The Terror Network"? Which was supposedly read by former POTUS RWReagan and was used by him as a partial justification for hard-line policies toward the USSR? Nah, none of those doubts ought to be raised. Thatthis might somehow, someway be US dis/misinformation is unlikely, and the reasoning behindthat would certainly be opaque, but not entirely impossible
Yes, the US faces tremendous problems, problems which could and have arisen, and probably did, with no help whatsoever from KGB media operations in the US. And one needn't have been a KGB operative to notice that the US is wracked by serious problems; one only had to be sentient and at least 7 seven years old.
Interesting indeed that the interviewer never asks what areas of news coverage are being most manipulated. And to what ends? well, i guess we can elimate the sports news coverage as a target of soviet active measures. Wait, wait, wait; what about those demands for greater minority representation in the front offices of professonal sports franchises? Damn thoose commies, they never rest.
It is interesting indeed that the gist of this interview dovetails so nicely with the longstanding conservatives complaints of liberal media bias, and an out-of-control, politicized PC-ridden academic community and the "long-march" of the former '60s radicals through the institutions of the US. Makes you wonder, don't it? What if Bezmenov was peddling a line about Soviet media manipulation and demoraliztion that had to do with manipulating conservative greivances re things like taxes, abortion, the demands of tedious minorities, homosexual marriage and the like? That would not have been quite so useful, but that's just gratuitous conjecture on my part.
I'm wondering, what did Bezmenov do post 1985 after this interesting interview? Think i'll google him after this post.
It just occurred to me that US support of Israel is a commie plot! Very few Americans benefit in any material or ideological sense from Israel's overlordship of the Pallys. Yet, for decades the US public has been steadily force-fed a line that the welfare of that one unimportant country is of paramount concern to the US. And anyone questioning that conventional wisdom has very quickly seen his or her reputation and character thoroughly assassinated in the media. [No doubt leading to the demoralization of the specific individuals so attacked]. No doubt the Soviet commies planned to bankrupt the USA by embroiling us in Israel's endless wars. Well, that part seems to be working well enough. We are bankrupted, pretty much, and i'm thoroughly demoralized by the immense power of The Israel Lobby. Which may or may not be a front for sinister commie activities. Wher the fuck's House Committe on Un-American Activities and the Subversive Activities Control Board when you REALLY need those politicized backwaters to bestir themselves and actually do something useful? Alas, both abolished several decades ago.
Do you see where this guy's logic can lead you?
BTW, i'd be interested to hear Bezmenov's analysis of the demise of the Soviet Union. I don't think media manipulation was a contributing factor
A Google search turned up less than 10 web hits for Yuri Bezmenov, now known as Thomas Schuman, including the Wikipedia link below [please do your own google search - my search engine sucks]. And, if the info in Wikipedias is correct, which never is certain, lo and behold, interviewer G. E. Griffin was a member of the John Birch Society, an organization with a poor opinion of the commies, atthe time of the interview. Membership in the JBS does not in and of itself constitute proof that Bezmenov's tale is BS, it just raises a lot of doubt.
G. Edward Griffin is an interesting character in his own right: as well as belonging to the JBS at the time of the interview, he also promoted the bogus cancer treatment laetrile, and he's dabbed in movie production. Aagain, Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Edward_Griffin
jerseyflyer, did you do any homework on this?
-- Modified on 11/22/2009 12:31:03 AM
Thanks for pointing that out for us, Jerseyflyer.