Russia mourns.. The children are the real victims



At least 338 hostages, including 156 children are confirmed dead after a 48 hour siege ended in a frenzy of explosions and shooting. Most of the dead were killed when a bomb, planted by the terrorists, exploded in the school gymnasium where the hostages were being held. Russian forces then stormed the school. Inside the school the terrorists shot at the captives as they tried to escape.

This is heartbreaking. The chechnyan terrorists are using children as a tool against something they have no control over. I was watching DW news this morning and saw some images of the wounded children and I'm in awe, young young children are increasingly becoming victims to politics.

The question is: When will this stop? Will Russia ever give into the Chechnyan extremist demands? They aren't even extremists. They are sick, sick individuals.

As a reporter remarked, this is new and fertile grounds for terrorists not just in Russia, but around the world.
I hate to say it, but I think this a tactic that will work. I hate them for it, but at the same time it increases my fear. These are obviously people that hold no regard for anything other than their own fanatical beliefs.

It's one thing to be threatened myself, but if my kids are in danger - that's another story.

What kind of people shoot kids in the back?
Quote: Originally Posted by LadyC

What kind of people shoot kids in the back?

Only the sickest of the sick could do that. They are not even humans. I have seen the footage and I was in tears.

Unfortunately, this tactic will start to work in favor of those killers as more hostages are taken and more killings of innocent people continue.
Here's another thought, though. It might actually backfire on them. The world has seen these are fanatics that will do anything, so... why should we negotiate with them?

It's difficult to fight terrorists - we play by different rules than they do.
This is so terrible... every day in the newspapers how many ppl are died of it now.. on the news you see it..
But well we can't really do a thing... =\

I hope this will stop really fast and that no more people will die...

*My thoughts are with the people there..*
Reverend Blair
What kind of people shoot kids in the back?

Just about everybody with guns. Taking over a school is extreme because it tosses out any claims of it being an accident, but we've seen all sides kill children before.

Sometimes it's bombs, sometimes bullets, sometimes they are forced to be child soldiers and sometimes they just get starved. There isn't much new about this though.
Right on Reverend!!! using childern is nothing new. What could be more unfathomable than kidnapping a child and turning them into killer. And all you would have to do, to say "hey thats wrong" and I don't like not wear a diamond. There is a big difference between having a nice hollywood moment about issues, but to actually do a little something, no matter how small puts your house in order.
Huh? Have I missed something? What does wearing a diamond have to do with killing kids and/or turning them into killers?

There are diamonds that don't have "blood" on them.
Prove it!! when in doubt keep walking....but the canadian diamonds are alright I guess if you gotta have one
Reverend Blair
No diamonds in this house, Peapod...we're not much into jewelry. You are right, Lady C...not all diamonds are blood diamonds. There is a pretty good chance that blood diamonds are being laundered through the sale of allegedly bloodless diamonds though, even Canada's. AK-47's might be cheap, but they aren't free and greed remains the closest thing to a universal religion we have.

It isn't just diamonds though. There's oil (always oil) so burning as little as possible is good. There's the WTO and World Bank. There's the whole push for globalisation. There's GM crops. I could go on, but you get the idea...
Lady C here is a link you might find interesting.

Yes there are diamonds that are not blood diamonds, hard to prove with diamonds tho, but you should make an effort when he gives you your 2 carat to find out where it came from

Revrend please don't mention GM foods. I don't want to get started on a rampage...its a holiday here today
I really want a Polar Bear diamond, although I prefer pearls and opals.

Quote: Originally Posted by rev blair

There isn't much new about this though.

But usually kids are just "collateral damage" (man I hate that term) - I don't remember ever reading about a situation where kids were targetted deliberately.

And peapod - my 1/2 carat diamond came from Birks.
Lady C I sense you are kinda cool I can smell one a mile off. Its the lumberjack in she who is me. Yes I do know the jerks from birks Secret: peapod has lots of diamonds to! I am really fond of my star of fishing one
Reverend Blair
I don't really buy the collateral damage argument, Lady C. When somebody drops a bomb in a residential neighbourhood on the off chance that somebody they are after might be hiding there, that isn't collateral damage, it's bombing children.
Okay, maybe I'll try again - sometimes I don't explain well the first time. (of course, it couldn't possibly be your comprehension skills...)

If someone drops a bomb in a neighbourhood, of course there will be children killed, but were they the deliberate targets? Take hostages at a school, and there's no getting around the fact that they meant to kill/maim/terrify kids.

I hate the term collateral damage almost as much as friendly fire. They're cheap euphemisms.
As with all terror attacks it is best to sit back for a little bit and watch the story develop. The Bali attack, Phillipine attack and Madrid all had connections to intelligence agencies. As well, the Turkish attack was SO damn convenient NOT to raise suspicion.

I was out of town (I say this as this is the only time I watch TV), and on the morning of the attacks Blair and Bush were in London.

The media coverage of the massive war protests were suddenly "out maneuvoured" by the coverage of the Turkish bombings. The protests suddenly seemed moot as now the War on Terror was on European soil.

I was watching a question and answer session with Bush and Blair and these attacks diffused any tough queries and played right into their hands.

Coverage of thousands protesting war instantly disappeared from the airwares.

German Minister of Technology (which included supervision of German intelligence - the BND), Andreas von Bülow:

"This tactic is called a “false flag operation” or a “false flag recruitment”, used by both the CIA and Mossad for purposes of propaganda. “Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation,” von Bülow said, which is widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events.

Russian School Siege Bears Hallmarks of Potential Staged Psy-Op

Paul Joseph Watson for Alex Jones' Prison Planet | September 5 2004

The murky events of the school siege in which hundreds of children were killed are raising disturbing questions as to which entities were actually behind the co-ordination of the attack. Subsequent developments will bring a clearer picture but many indicators point to this event being a staged psy-op.

Most prominent terror incidents over the past twenty years have been state sponsored. That is not to say that the incident in North Ossetia hasn't been a harrowing experience for the victims involved. For them, the events were all too real.

The wave of terror began when two Tupolev passenger airliners crashed within minutes of each other on the night of August 26th.

The election of the Chechen president which took place two days later saw the Kremlin's choice overwhelmingly win with a landslide. The London Guardian called it a 'farcical election'.

The Russians were the only ones to benefit from the plane crashes.

The independent Russian media, what's left of it after years of brutal crackdown, are saying that the planes were not hijacked and bombed by terrorists on board, but that the Russian air defenses purposefully shot down the airliners to then blame the Chechens. The fact that the aircraft wreckage was strewn across a large area supports the shoot down theory more so than the contention that a small shoe bomb was detonated on board.

The past track record of the FSB, the former KGB also lends credence to this contention.

There is a sub-section on Prison within the 9/11 archive which details how the apartment bombings of the late 90’s which were blamed on the Chechens, were actually carried out by the Russian FSB. A particular example was in a place called Ryazan, where people witnessed FSB agents planting hexogen explosives, the same explosives we’re told were used to bring this plane down. The first call the 'terrorists' placed was traced to the highest office of the FSB and they were allowed to leave the country.

Whether these planes were taken down by missiles or hexogen explosives, the culprits are still unknown and I firmly believe that we’ll see yet more evidence emerge that this was a staged action, albeit sloppily carried out, as was the March train bombing in Madrid, Spain.

Furthermore, we're now told now that the black boxes were found and that they indicate the pilots tried to save the plane after the explosion had taken place. But initially they said the black boxes hadn’t recorded anything, but now suddenly, after they had blamed the Chechens, they miraculously fix themselves.

In the case of the school siege, one would expect the terrorists' identity to be clear and their demands clearly understood. In this instance, the opposite is the case as a result of a conscious effort by the Russian government to cover-up the true identity and motive of the terrorists.

Any real terrorist organization would claim responsibility for an event almost immediately. Chechen separatist leaders have stated that the Chechens had nothing to do with the plane crashes or the school siege.

The Russian government took the action of blocking all telephone communications in Beslan, supposedly to prevent the terrorists from communicating with outside organizers who were not at the scene of the events. However, if the terrorists had planned to do this, wouldn't they just use radio communications or satellite phones?

The videotape that the hostage-takers gave to the Russian authorities was blank. Why would a tape supposedly containing the demands of the terrorists be blank unless it was deliberately erased by the Russians?

Akhmed Zakayev, a special envoy to Chechen separatist leader Aslan Maskhadov, told the Caucasus Times newspaper, "a third force that brought Russian President Vladimir Putin to power” is behind all the terrorist attacks committed in Russia over the past two weeks.

For weeks myself and Alex Jones stated many times on Alex's radio show that we would probably see a major terrorist incident abroad during the Republican National Convention.

In a sick twist of fate, Bush re-election campaign commericials have been running for weeks where Bush makes reference of a mother being forced to choose between which child she wants to pick up from school in the event of a terrorist attack.

Similar stories have been carried by US news networks related to the school siege in Russia.

Was this merely a coincidence or a carefully crafted brainwashing technique. If it is deliberate then Bush and the people who control him had advanced knowledge of the school siege.

Click here to watch the Bush commercial.

There are several other contradictions to the story that haven't been resolved. Exactly how many of the terrorists escaped and where are they now?

Were FSB agents involved in gunning down any of the victims when the building was stormed?

We will continue to track the fallout of this story as more develops.
Reverend Blair
If you do something that you know is going to kill and maim children, then they are targets, Lady C. It isn't a matter of the kids being in the wrong place at the wrong time if they are where they belong, it's a matter of diregard for the safety of civilians and putting the lives of soldiers above those of civilians. That's a war crime, BTW.

North Ossetia differs only in that the terrorists never bothered to deny the children were targets. Does that make them more or less reprehensible than states who drop bombs on civilians, or just the same? I'd say just the same.

I kind of wondered about the false flag thing myself, Vista. Taking over a school and shooting kids in the back seems an unlikely way to gain political support. The kids cannot be construed as a political target, after all.
Quote: Originally Posted by Rev Blair

The kids cannot be construed as a political target, after all.

No, but what better way to strike fear into their parents - the ones who can do what you want them to?

Maybe I'm quibbling about the targets - but taking kids as hostages seems so much more deliberate. And I hate to imagine their last hours/days.

LC you gotta watch out for this girl. She's one of us, and that can be scary. Oh and Pea, LC knows all about my love affair with diamonds and other gems, she's actually helping me find what I want.

But back to topic. That whole scene made me sick to my stomach. How could any parent, regardless of religion, come even close to doing this to children.

Personally, if there was any way we could seperate those murdering "CENSORED" (big letters cause I'm really mad) I think I would take a page out of history and gas them.
This occurance is most frightening to anybody where it is close to. We are not Russia because we never had such big problems with kommunism and our past is not as rough but it is still to close to home for me to feel safe. The kids and the family of them must be so upset and angry at what had happened.

My family mourn also with the family who lost so much.
Yes my thoughts are with the families too. What they have suffered is unspeakable and most defintely unnecessary.
Will we ever know the true culprits of these atrocites?


MOSCOW, September 6 (RIA Novosti) - Terrorists who seized a school in North Ossetia's Beslan, September 1, were receiving orders from abroad throughout the three suspense-laden days, says Aslanbek Aslakhanov, President Vladimir Putin's adviser for North Caucasian affairs.

"The men had their conversations not within Russia but with other countries. They were led on a leash. Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades, I deem, to dismember Russia. They are doing a huge, really titanic job. It's clear as daylight that those people are coming up as puppeteers and are financing terror," he said to the Rossia television company, national Channel Two, tonight.

Though the bandits named certain people they wanted to see as negotiators, and Mr. Aslakhanov was among them, he is sure the terrorist gang really did not mean whatever contacts.

Aslanbek Aslakhanov, a Chechen, was on the site throughout the tragedy, and contacted the gang on the telephone. "The men were certainly not Chechens. When I spoke Chechen with them, they said they couldn't make out a word. 'Speak Russian,' they told me. Well, I did as they wished, though I speak Russian with a Caucasian accent," he said in his TV interview.
So are they Russians, Chechens, Arabs, Western Europeans? I understand they might not be chechens, so would you consider them to be Russians against the current system?
I wouldn't hazard a guess yet as this is a story still unfolding and will for some time.

As Asia Times reports, "with Putin's Chechen plans in pieces, he is under tremendous pressure to apply even greater military pressure on Chechens to break their will to independence."

The Irish Examiner, "The militants who seized a school in Russia, killing more than 350 people may have had help from local police, an official admitted yesterday. Valery Andreyev, local head of the FSB security service, was quoted by Moscow radio station Ekho Moskvy as saying the militants may have received help from local police, possibly because they were coerced."

In the end we know what the end result will be. Loss of rights for citizens. The irony - "terrorists" terrorize, citizens lose their rights. One only need to look south.

And the other irony, citizens hope these restrictions will bring more security.
Reverend Blair
It isn't like the Chechen rebels are the only ones doing this though.,00.html
Reverend, that is a good article. These issues usually have an undercurrent that gets overlooked on a TV soundbite.

This is from today's Asia Times,

The interest of the US in the Caucasus is control over oil supplies from the Caspian Sea, which involves securing compliant regimes in the southern Caucasus, including Azerbaijan, where the oil is extracted, and Georgia, through which the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline will pass. As a consequence of this dominant interest, the US is also committed to thwarting any attempt by Russia to expand its influence in the Caucasus. From the American viewpoint, Russian failure in Chechnya is welcome, as long as it does not get to the point that Chechnya becomes a base for Islamic revolution worldwide.

In the current strategic environment, the US is constrained to give public support to Russian efforts to curb terrorism, but that does not mean that it takes Russia's side in practice. Not only did the US criticize the August 29 election as being "neither free nor fair", but it has granted asylum to Ilyas Akhmadov, the foreign minister of Maskhadov's opposition government, leaving him free to pursue diplomacy aimed at winning international support for Maskhadov's Republic of Ichkeria. The Putin regime has complained of an American "double standard" in the "war on terror", but has been powerless to stop the American support of the opposition.

Maskhadov is pursuing a novel strategy of sending his government ministers into exile in different countries so that they can gain maximum diplomatic leverage. Culture minister Akhmed Zakayev has been granted asylum in Great Britain; health minister Umar Khanbiyev is in France; social defense minister Apti Bisultanov is based in Germany. Maskhadov's dispersion strategy has led to publicity for his proposal to internationalize the Chechen conflict through guarantees of the country's autonomy and to contacts with non-government organizations. Whether NATO powers are formally involved with the Ichkerian exile government is unclear, but at the very least they are granting it a measure of legitimacy and sending a signal to Moscow that they are not supportive of its success in Chechnya.

The US and the European Union have called for Russia to negotiate with the separatists. France and Germany have played both sides of the table, distancing themselves from the US by endorsing the August 29 election, but also urging negotiation. Their ambivalence is based on their desire for stronger relations with Russia to counter American influence in Eastern Europe and to build economic relations, particularly in the oil sector. At the same time, they also want Caspian Sea oil free from Russian control.

With no apparent favorable options, it is likely that the conflict in Chechnya will result in a setback for Russia's geostrategic interests in the Caucasus. Faced with a population that remains ill disposed to Russian rule and is not organized coherently enough to make a bargain, and confronted by external powers that have an interest in diminishing Moscow's influence in the region, Putin's regime is in a bind from which it will be difficult, if not impossible, to extricate itself. Over time, Moscow will be tempted either to withdraw or to apply massive force. In the short term, it will probably continue its failed policies, possibly with additional shows of force that will not change the basic situation.

The most likely scenario of prolonged instability will weaken Putin's credibility and give him less leeway elsewhere in the Caucasus, providing an advantage to the NATO powers.

Did I hear someone say, CIA/Mossad?

No I'm not drawing conclusions. This story has legs...
This from the Guardian...

"Although the White House issued a condemnation of the Beslan hostage-takers, its official view remains that the Chechen conflict must be solved politically. According to ACPC member Charles Fairbanks of Johns Hopkins University, US pressure will now increase on Moscow to achieve a political, rather than military, solution - in other words to negotiate with terrorists, a policy the US resolutely rejects elsewhere.

Allegations are even being made in Russia that the west itself is somehow behind the Chechen rebellion, and that the purpose of such support is to weaken Russia, and to drive her out of the Caucasus. The fact that the Chechens are believed to use as a base the Pankisi gorge in neighbouring Georgia - a country which aspires to join Nato, has an extremely pro-American government, and where the US already has a significant military presence - only encourages such speculation. Putin himself even seemed to lend credence to the idea in his interview with foreign journalists on Monday.

Proof of any such western involvement would be difficult to obtain, but is it any wonder Russians are asking themselves such questions when the same people in Washington who demand the deployment of overwhelming military force against the US's so-called terrorist enemies also insist that Russia capitulate to hers?"

Cui Bono?
Reverend Blair
It's no big surprise that the US and EU are using this to try to gain maximum advantage, especially since oil is involved.