This article written shortly after the "coup" and published in the Sept. 24, 1991, New American points out many little known facts about the fake coup and what the real purpose behind this coup was. It is designed to bring in the godless New World Order which is anti God, anti Christ and against the best interests of each one of us.

       It was a memorable week. First, a coup in the USSR on Monday, August 19, spurred practically all commentators in the West to predict a reversion to diehard communist intransigence. Then, only three days later, the coup failed and the plotters, except for those who reportedly committed suicide, were arrested. Next, Mikhail Gorbachev returned to Moscow from his 72-hour "captivity" at his vacation residence, only to find Boris Yeltsin basking in international acclaim as the hero who faced down the conspirators. Gorbachev was forced to submit to a humiliating public dressing down at the hands of Yeltsin, his on-again-off-again friend. Where Yeltsin had become the man of the hour, Gorbachev — Time magazine's Man of the Decade — had become a pathetic falling star.

       The story continued to unfold when Gorbachev disbanded Communist Party leadership, resigned as its head, and destroyed its 70-year-old ironclad grip over the peoples of the Soviet Union. His next step included dissolving his own cabinet of ministers and, together with Yeltsin, creating a committee to run the nation's economy, exactly what one might expect of two socialists. As an indication of Yeltsin's newly acquired clout, it was his aide, Ivan Silayev, who was appointed to lead this new group.

       Across the length and breadth of the Soviet Union, communist functionaries scurried to disavow any further affiliation to the party, and the statues of old Bolsheviks — Communist Party founder Lenin, KGB founder Dzerzhinsky, and revolutionary hero Sverdlow — were torn down by jubilant throngs. Happy Muscovites paraded through the Soviet capital with the pre-1917 tricolor flag of Russia.

       The seizing of KGB archives and Communist Party buildings sent a wave of euphoria among the people. But with those records gone, a great deal of evidence about the crimes of past and present Soviet leaders disappears.

       Then, one after another, the various "republics" that had been forced into membership in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics either declared their independence or took steps in that direction. The once-mighty and greatly feared Soviet Union seemed to be collapsing from within.

Trusted Comrades

       Led by Gorbachev's hand-picked vice president, Gennady I. Yanayev, the coup leaders announced on August 19 that Gorbachev had taken ill while on vacation in the Crimea and that they had taken control of the government in order to rescue the nation from economic and political crisis. Believers of everything else that had come out of the USSR for decades refused to accept claims about Gorbachev's illness.

       The eight-man ruling group calling itself the State Committee for the State of Emergency was made up mostly of Gorbachev's friends. Yanayev's comrades, who were also Gorbachev appointees, included KGB Chairman Vladimir A. Kryuchkov, Defense Minister Dimitri T. Yazov, Prime Minister Valentin S. Pavlov, and Interior Minister (in charge of Soviet police) Boris K. Pugo. Gorbachev was later to express regret over being betrayed by men he "trusted." We are supposed to believe that there's something resembling real trust among KGB chieftains, secret police leaders, and top Soviet military leaders. The truth is that none of these individuals is trustworthy, as any man who ever served in the high councils of communism well knows.

       Other coup participants included Soviet Peasants Union leader Vasily A. Starodubtsev, the head of the Association of State Enterprises and Industrial Facilities Alexander I. Tizyakov, and Defense Council Deputy Chairman Oleg D. Baklanov. Three days after the coup had failed, Marshal Sergei F. Akhromeyev, Gorbachev's chief military advisor, allegedly hanged himself in seeming response to his imminent disgrace as a supporter of the plot.

       The reported suicide of Akhromeyev and the public participation of Yazov in the coup indicates that the USSR's two top military men were part of the conspiracy. What is interesting about these two is that each had been a 1989 welcomed visitor to Council on Foreign Relations headquarters in New York City. While there, each had addressed the leaders of the U.S. Establishment in a closed-door session and were then rewarded by having their photos appear in montages on the covers of the CFR's 1990 Annual Report. And every one of those CFR favors, including a photo on the same Annual Report cover, were also accorded Boris Yeltsin.

A Kinder, Gentler Coup

       Rarely has the world been treated to a coup d'etat where the targeted leaders weren't speedily assassinated. Not only was Gorbachev not harmed physically, he was even allowed equipment to produce a videotaped denunciation of his captors that he later released upon his return to Moscow.

       Had this been a well-planned and well-coordinated coup, Boris Yeltsin, the greatest potential adversary of the plot, would have been swiftly done in. Instead, he spent the first day denouncing the takeover from a lightly defended building, and the second day rallying the people of Moscow while standing on a tank. American television coverage later insisted that Soviet tanks and armored personnel carriers had been "turned back by the people," marking what was probably the first time in history that unarmed civilians defeated armed tanks.

       To succeed, the coup needed the full backing of the military. Yet, apparent indecision and a curious lack of leadership left the military impotent. Without the muscle to enforce the will of the plotters, the coup lasted only a few days.

       Were Yanayev and his comrades so inept as not to assure the compliance of the military? Were they so foolish that they launched their effort with only the hope that the military would support them?

       Another curious and unexplained incident was Defense Minister Yazov's flight to the Crimea to visit with Gorbachev only hours before the coup began. Was Yazov a messenger sent to inform Gorbachev that he was now under arrest? Was the Soviet defense minister seeking to bring Gorbachev into the coup? Was he presenting the final details of the scenario that would be offered to the world?

       Yazov's last-minute visit with Gorbachev should have raised more questions than it has. Was he himself betrayed by Gorbachev? Was he a victim of a clever bit of double-dealing; and will he suffer death as Yeltsin and Gorbachev should have suffered had the plotters been more competent? Where are the mass media's vaunted investigative reporters?

       In his initial report about the plot, Bill Keller of the New York Times suggested an interesting scenario. His article, written the day of the coup and appearing on the front page of the August 20 Times, mentioned that former Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze "held out the possibility today that Mr. Gorbachev had gone along with the hard-line takeover under pressure, and could re-emerge as its figurehead."

       Two days later, in his press conference joyfully announcing the end of the coup, President Bush was asked to comment about a CNN report claiming that the President of the Georgian Republic of the USSR had said that "this was all a plot by Gorbachev himself."

       Mr. Bush, clearly angry at the suggestion that his good friend Gorbachev would be a party to such a conspiracy, insisted that such a statement "makes absolutely no sense at all."

       Arriving at the scene of any crime, of course, a competent detective would immediately ask, "Who benefits?" With his popularity among the people of the USSR at rock bottom, and facing the prospect of an actual election next year in which he would likely be defeated, Gorbachev had plenty to gain from a bungled coup.

       And, as is obvious from his soaring ascendancy as the chief adversary of the plot, so did Yeltsin. What Mr. Bush so vehemently denied about Gorbachev's possible complicity makes plenty of sense. Once confusion reigned, of course, Gorbachev himself could now be betrayed.

       We don't know whether or not the whole incident was arranged. But the possibility that Gorbachev was in on it, even to the point of double-crossing his friends who instigated the coup, cannot be overlooked. These individuals are capable of any kind of treachery. Those who now stand by their "shaken" leader are equally untrustworthy.

THE NEW WORLD ORDER This cartoon depicts the chilling truth of the latest thrust towards the New World Order. Gorbachev plays his role as a fan of the Pope yet professes still to be an atheist. Perhaps the cartoon, a wolf in sheep's clothing, would more readily depict the true Gorbachev.

Assessing the Coup

       Former U.S. Representative to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick expressed the view of several Establishment figures who seemed puzzled by what was happening. One day after the coup, she told the New York Times that "it's wholly impossible to predict the long-run consequences" of the turmoil.

       Our own assessment of these developments issued as a J.B.S. press release the day of the coup, included our belief that "the coup bringing Yanayev to power will not likely last," and "Gorbachev's return is a real possibility." Our main reason for taking such a stand was also given: "The New World Order, meaning socialism and world government, mentioned by both Mikhail Gorbachev and President Bush, will more likely be achieved with a Gorbachev than with a Yanayev."

       No clairvoyance was needed to make this forecast. All that was needed was an understanding of the goals of the architects of the new world order. The American people cannot be expected to merge with a country that is an overt Stalinist dictatorship. But they might be expected to merge with a "friend".

       As the events unfolded, our prognostications were borne out and, upon returning to Moscow, one of Gorbachev's first statements was, "I'm convinced socialism is correct." The New World Order hadn't suffered any setback. Because its chief beneficiaries are socialists, it was itself a beneficiary of the incident.

       Analysts claim that a chief reason for staging the coup was the planned signing of a sweeping union treaty by Gorbachev and the leaders of the major republics within the USSR on August 20. The treaty would have drastically cut central government power over the 15 republics. The hardliners behind the coup were reported to have been concerned about their loss of power, especially the power associated with vast amounts of patronage traditionally at their disposal.

Recognizing the Republics

       With the failed coup a matter of history, however, the leaders of most of the republics are no longer interested in a treaty holding them in union with the central government. Most want out of the USSR — fast. Declarations of independence apart from the Kremlin have come in a flood. And recognition of their independence by the leaders of other nations has followed.

       Standing alongside Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney at his Maine vacation home, President Bush adopted a go-slow attitude regarding independence for the three Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia). Mr. Mulroney disagreed, saying he would be delighted to recognize the independence of these three beleaguered nations.

       The United States has never officially recognized the absorption of these three nations by the USSR. For almost 50 years, that refusal has served as quiet assurance to the peoples of these nations that America would be the first to stand by their side when any chance for real independence from Moscow developed.

       The hesitation on Mr. Bush's part has to have something to do with the New World Order and the need for its backers to have leaders of each of these nations pledged to socialism and eventual world government. Obviously in possession of that pledge, Mr. Bush extended the official recognitions.

       The breakup of the USSR seems inevitable. But no forecast of what will happen should overlook the determination of world leaders to create that long-sought-after New World Order. Keeping the goals of its advocates always in mind, let us speculate that there will soon no longer be a USSR as it has existed for many decades. Many independent nations will be created out of the 15 republics. But they will quickly be bound in an economic union closely resembling the European Community that will bind Western European nations in 1992. The former Soviet satellite nations of Eastern Europe will then be invited into this economic union and their leaders — all socialists acceptable to New World Order backers — will gladly accept.

       Socialist Boris Yeltsin will remain the leader of Russia, by far the largest, most populous, and most powerful of all of the USSR's entities. Mikhail Gorbachev could even fade from the scene, but will more likely be rewarded with a role in a newly formed Eastern European Community. In time, there will be a merger of the two European economic unions so that there will be socialistic control of the people "from the Atlantic to the Urals" as has already been envisioned by some.

       President Bush, with the help of dutiful members of Congress, will seek passage of massive new aid programs of Boris Yeltsin and the various breakaway republics of the USSR.

       Whether the near-bankrupt and already overtaxed American public will allow themselves to be made financiers of such plans is of critical importance. If the U.S. Treasury's purse can be closed by the power of public opinion, the plans for the New World Order will be stymied.

       If those plans continue to unfold, New World Order enthusiasts in America, certainly including George Bush if he's still President, will have successfully entwined Canada, Mexico and the United States in a similar economic union. And the economic merger of East and West, always a prelude to political merger, will be proposed by U.S. leaders as a means of avoiding being frozen out by the Europeans. To put the matter succinctly, these are critically important times.

As we reported in the last issue of The Fatima Crusader, the Holy Father knows that he has not Consecrated Russia as Our Lady of Fatima commanded. He is afraid that some bishops will not obey him. The Fatima Crusader has shown that he need not fear. Through the Fatima message Jesus tells us to "Pray, pray a great deal for the Holy Father".

Socialist Middle Ground

       Communism itself is dying as one of the world's major forces. But socialism, which is economic control of the people by government, is thriving everywhere — especially here in the United States. And socialism is the first half of the New World Order we have so often heard mentioned during the past year. The other half, world government, would be readily accepted by nations already united economically.

       In 1953, congressional investigator Norman Dodd was told by H. Rowan Gaither, the head of the prestigious Ford Foundation, that he and others were working under instructions to "so alter life in the United States" that our nation could be "comfortably merged with the Soviet Union." Awareness of that blunt statement given by an obvious supporter of the New World Order has led many to fear that our nation would be driven into communism. But the merger of our two nations (and the rest of the world) could also be accomplished by driving America into socialism and having the socialist USSR renounce communism.

       Writing in the J.B.S. Bulletin for November 1, 1989, my colleague, Gary Benoit (now editor of The New American), forecasted the following. His look into the future was given prior to the tearing down of the Berlin Wall that startled virtually everyone.

       Just as the West is moving toward communism and socialism, the communist nations appear to be moving toward the West. The game plan spelled out by H. Rowan Gaither years ago is being followed to the letter. The gap between the communist and non-communist worlds is being significantly narrowed in preparation for the merger. Presumably, East and West will meet on a "socialist" middle ground.

       As part of the game plan, communist nations that have always operated under the name of communism might even give up, or at least deemphasize, that name. Should they do so, however, they would in effect be giving up nothing since they have always been and would still remain totalitarian socialists. The communists might even tear down the Berlin Wall and lift the Iron Curtain for the purpose of reuniting Western and Eastern Europe. Such a significant event would win the communists much Western support. Yet, if Western Europe continues its progression toward socialism and interdependence, the only real winners would be the leaders of the supranational world government.

       All of this, of course, does not have to continue to unfold. A rising tide of revulsion directed at their own leaders by the American people can put a stop to it. No more foreign aid to any nation, certainly including socialist quagmires like the USSR or whatever any new name might be devised for it! No more socialism here at home, and a start toward untying America from socialist bonds already stifling her!

Return to
Table of Contents