Proof positive of post-nuclear weapons in China and Russia

---

See the Lev Navrozov Archive By Lev Navrozov SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM Lev Navrozov emigrated from the Soviet Union in 1972 He settled in New York City where he quickly learned that there was no market for his eloquent and powerful English language attacks on the Soviet Union. To this day, he writes without fear or favor or the conventions of polite society. He chaired the "Alternative to the New York Times Committee" in 1980, challenged the editors of the New York Times to a debate (which they declined) and became a columnist for the New York City Tribune. His columns are today read in both English and Russian. .

In my WorldTribune.com column of June 23, ÒWorld Peace vs. World Domination . . .Ó I made fun of William Stroupe, a reader who called for proofs of the development of post-nuclear weapons in China and Russia, the twain now in officially declared military Òpartnership.Ó

Proofs? Suppose a certain Japanese said publicly between 1939 to 1944 that the United States was developing bombs, each of which would be able to turn a city to radioactive dust. If Mr. Stroupe had been living in Japan at that time as a native Japanese citizen, he would have demanded proofs!

Now, what proofs could the Japanese truth-sayer present? Suppose he had stolen all documents pertaining to the U.S. Òatomic projectÓ and presented them to Mr. Stroupe. But surely all documents may be forgeries. The only ironclad proof would have been as follows. Members of the Manhattan Project would have staged a nuclear bomb explosion as proof to convince Mr. Stroupe that the development of the Òatom bombÓ was real. The only trouble is that such a demonstration was impossible until the Òatom bombsÓ were ready to be dropped on two Japanese cities. As they were turning to radioactive dust, Mr. Stroupe (hopefully, he was not in one of them) would have believed that the development of the new weapons had been real.

Much to my surprise, on June 24, the next day after my column appeared in WorldTribune.com, Mr. Stroupe sent me another letter, calling for proofs of the Sino-Russian development of post-nuclear weapons.

The situation is, indeed, graver than it was. Mr. Stroupe would like to read my book, being published online in weekly installments of ten to twenty-odd pages each. The pay for an installment is $3, which go to the account of the Center for the Survival of Western Democracies, a nonprofit founded in 1978 to convince the West (without proofs) as to the development of post-nuclear weapons in Russia. Miraculously, the newly elected President Yeltsin of Russia opened the bioweapons part of this development to international inspection. So we had been telling the life-or-death truth without any proofs.

Mr. Stroupe's problem is formidable. He is supposed to pay $3 for an installment without being sure that it presents THE PROOFS.

ÒDear Mr. Navrozov,

ÒI appreciate your public response to my email! However, I would like to state that, while I am very interested in your book, I still feel as though I am required to make that purchase without sufficient information about its contents.Ó

Well, in my announcement after every column of mine, it is said that every reader can request (webmaster@levnavrozov.com) to send him by e-mail my outline of my book. From that outline it is clear that my book is about the societal mental regression of the West, as a result of which the Western political establishment did not notice the development of Soviet post-nuclear superweapons from 1972 to 1992, of Chinese post-nuclear superweapons since1986, and the Sino-Russian military Òpartnership,Ó officially announced last May.

Mr. Stroupe is a fair sample of this mental regression. He seems never to have heard of how zealously the development of new geostrategically decisive superweapons is guardedÑhe seems never to have heard of military secrecy or of the importance of strategic surprise. He is like a child of two, who knows nothing about the history of the 20th century, in which he was born.

Mr. Stroupe takes my book for the complete 100,000-volume file of all espionage-intelligence data on the military development of China and Russia, which espionage-intelligence data I sell at $3 an installment. Indeed, Mr. Stroupe inquires whether my book contains the relevant DOCUMENTATION about those ÒeightÓ (actually seven) fields of development of post-nuclear weapons in China, to which I refer.

No problem! I will call Òthe supreme leader of China.Ó ÒHu? I am in a quandary, pal. In my book I am referring to the seven fields in which China has been developing post-nuclear superweapons. Can you send me the relevant documentation? How many apartments should I rent in New York to accommodate it? Will 200 two-bedroom apartments be enough?Ó

Then Mr. Stroupe explains that he is Ònot really a skeptic on the subject at all.Ó He insists on the DOCUMENTATION. Bring him the DOCUMENTS from the most secret vaults of the owners of China, and he will believe. A rational man, not a skeptic!

ÒPlease do not misconstrue my position here. I am not really a skeptic on the subject at all. In fact, I believe that such an effort must, in fact, be underway. But at the same time I do not wish to spend the considerable amount for your book and come away with mostly unsupported suspicion, which is what I have already. I am looking for real proof, to the extent possible for secret projects like this, of course. And I am looking for additional insight into what directions their research has taken, and what possible technological developments they have possibly achieved. I am looking for enough details to explain these matters to others, and to be able to rest easy with my own convictions (now mostly unsupported) on the subject.Ó

The letter ends with the same plea for proofs:

ÒI firmly believe that Russia and China and perhaps others have been feverishly researching and developing superweapon #3, but I cannot now offer any proof or details of my suspicions. Please, Mr. Navrozov, can you provide me with a clear indication as to whether or not your book would fill in at least some of the blanks for me?Ó

True, in 1992 President Yeltsin presented the proofs: he opened the former Soviet bioweapons archipelago to international inspection. But Mr. Stroupe may well say that the project related to the past and had not been finishedÑSuperweapon No. 3 able to destroy the enemy means of nuclear retaliation had not been obtained.

What incontrovertible proof could be presented to Mr. Stroupe? Even 200 two-bedroom apartments of the DOCUMENTATION sent by the Òsupreme leader of ChinaÓ can be rejected, since they may be forgeries.

I see only one possible incontrovertible proof that Mr. Stroupe will have to accept, and hence pay $3 for an installment of my book. Indeed, there will be a button on the Home Page of the website publishing my book. As soon as Mr. Stroupe presses it, China will, by my special arrangement with the supreme leader of China, destroy all Western means of nuclear retaliation. Thus Mr. Stroupe will be able to see that this can be done and to see how it is done. So far it will be all nice and fair, and Mr. Stroupe's $3 will not be wasted.

Then there may come an ultimatum similar to that presented to Japan in 1945: unconditional surrender or nuclear death.

Unfortunately, while Japan could not come up with nuclear weapons when the ultimatum lasted, the West may be able to do something to slip out of the ultimatum, and in this case China will have to annihilate the West instead of presenting it with an ultimatum. But what is important? Mr. Stroupe will have the incontrovertible proof that the owners of China, with the ÒpartnershipÓ of Russia, have been developing post-nuclear weapons for world domination, with or without the annihilation of the West. Even if the annihilation of the West is chosen by the owners of China, before his death Mr. Stroupe will know Ñ free of charge! Ñ how the Western means of nuclear retaliation can be and have been destroyed or neutralized by the owners of China. In comparison, my book is, in this respect, pathetic, and I do not advise Mr. Stroupe to spend 3 cents for an installment, to say nothing of $3.