As much as this statement is found to be shockingly true, when coming from the mouth of Barack Obama’s top advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski it brings the chills as to what are the plans and the future for the common mortal on a “World Domination”.
Meet Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski a Polish American political scientist, Councelor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Professor of American Foreign Policy at the John Hopkins University, who has been National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (from 1977-1981), a Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission, an International Advisor of several major US/Global corporations, an Associate of Henry Kissinger, who has been a member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under the Ronald Reagan Administration and past member at the Board of Directors at the Council of Foreign Relations, a co-chairman of the Bush National Security advisory task force (1988) and presently a top advisor on the Middle East Policy for Barack Obama,
in other words
These were his words during an off-the record speech at the Chatham House of London in 2008 at the Whitehead Lecture titled: Major Foreign Policy Challenges for the next US Presidency.
“…The major world powers, new and old, also face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low…..To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control a million people than to physically kill a million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.”You may listen to his speech here.
It seems that for Zbigniew Brzezinski the world is a big chessboard and his mission is to make the right moves that will lead to a one world government run by corporations.
In his book “The Grand Chessboard” published in 1997 he wrote:
The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role. In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first as well as the only truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last.
Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a concensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.
Take a note on the words in bold “WIDELY PERCEIVED” direct external threat. It doesn’t have to exist, but certainly it has to be made “P E R C E I V E D” as an external threat.
If this does not signal the cases of the war in Iraq, Iran’s “nuclear threat”, “Al Qaeda”, “terrorism”, then what is?
As Mike Ruppert, American Author and investigative journalist, put it: “The third Reich did not lose the World War II. It just changed venues”.
The US (to be precise the US Big Corporations families, as they are the ones ruling the capitalistic US) have made their imperialistic goals quite clear since the very beginning of their existence. Under the pretext of a phenomenally external “enemy” which at times represented an ideology like “Communism” (today the lights are on “terrorism”) and at others a physical entity – a nation like “Russia” or “Japan” (today it’s Iran) they would initiate wars (and not just physically) to eliminate the power of others so they would domineer in the grand chessboard. Nowadays with the ease in communication and with educated people ready to raise their voice more critical than ever, the policy is to disorient public opinion so they will silently execute their big plans, plans which have no relevance with what they appear to the mass to be.
An example: if a “strict line” or “tension” appears to exist in the relationships between the US and Iran today, it’s sufficient to simply mention the fact that it was Jimmy Carter with Zbigniew Brzezinski as the national security advisor who had pushed for the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran : “The Carter-Brzezinski axis is very much responsible for the Islamic revolution—the most dangerous revolution that has occurred in human history, a revolution that threatens the existence of every nation-state” as per Prof. Paul Eidelberg, a political scientist, author and lecturer. Read more here.
On the other hand, if you think that Russia is no longer in the list of America’s biggest “enemies” you have been misled. In fact we are still living the Cold War and the imperialists’ “target list” is worryingly growing. The ultimate goal is to hit the interrelations between states, by studying and analysing the relationship dynamics, recognizing and attacking the “Achilles tendon” of each country on target, commonly known as the divide and conquer rule.
“The center of the power of the world, is not Iran, its Moscow and Beijing and therefore Brzezinski is determined to smash Russia and China in order to let the US-British World Domination going on for another 100 years.” Webster Tarpley
Webster Tarpley is an Historian and an author of two books on Barack Obama whom he describes as the “Manchurian Candidate”, a simple puppet in the hands of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski and his clique of bankers.
“Beware of Obama, he’s not what you think. They try to make him look like a Muslim. In the US they try to… He may have been a Muslim at one point, that they want to hide in the US. But in the world they wanna say oh he’s a Muslim, you should like him… hahahah”…
In his books, Webster Tarpley explains how the real masters of the US have chosen a person like Barack Obama with a dark past and purposedly hidden records which if revealed would cost him the security clearance for the Presidential position, to establish him as the wind of change.
“The same old imperialism with a face lift”
“He’s a puppet of finance capital of the worst possible circles, of David Rockefeller, George Soros and his group and their project is extreme austerity, savage deductions in the standard of living and basically the immiseration and impoverishment of the United States. In terms of foreign policy it is this plan to have a global showdown with Russia and China. So for that they need “left” cover.”
How can the US “attack” Russia and China and minimize their power and influence so they can preserve their place as global superpower? By isolating them and creating tensions both internally and externally. As per the historian and author W. Tarpley whereas the neo-cons (neo-conservatives) would go straight for Iran suggesting even bombing it, this advanced war they advocate would simply have to transform Iran as a tool against Russia.
Same case for China, i.e. they would simply have to either attack or make an agreement with “Sudan” that is China’s major oil supplier to actually damage China with a hit below the belt. Is it coincidental that Sudanese forces were “allowed” to invade Libya, help in ousting Gaddafi and occupy Libyan territory?
“The goal in Africa is to kick the Chinese out. Deprive China oil and raw materials, minerals they get from Africa. Ultimately Brzezinski would like to encircle China, isolate China and then reach a point where China would have no way to turn to oil, except the Russian oil wells eastern of Siberia. The end policy is to turn China against Russia, then get rid of them both, destroy both and then the Us-British can settle in for another 100 years.”
Another “innovation” in the form of pretext for interfering in Africa and Middle East? HUMAN RIGHTS! Discovering humanitarian emergencies (did they just find out? No- it was simply the Joker card they would keep aside to play whenever they would need it) or even inventing humanitarian concerns and issues in many places around the world , they can exercise pressure on the local leaders of the country they need affected to fit their greater plans.
Only by getting the pieces of this global puzzle together then you may have the full picture. Connect the dots, learn the WORLD HISTORY, this is what we are now LIVING.
If it didn’t click already, here is where Obama’s ambiguous muslim past sticks to the whole plan for getting the muslim countries of Africa and Middle East involved one way or the other. Actually there is no innovation in an old “building rapport” trick. Having earned favoritism from muslims: “Instead of having Muslims as being the targets, the Muslims become cannon fall for the project against Russia and China“. in other words YOU ARE USED FOR THEIR BIGGER PLANS. And what are their bigger plans again as per Brzezinski?:
“The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role.”
Barack Obama was recruited and groomed by Brzezinski to make that certain.
Excerpt from “Barack H. Obama: The Unauthorized Biography” by Webster Tarpley, 2008
Obama’s years at Columbia University between 1981 and 1983 constitute the greatest single mystery of his life. From the point of view of all available biographical material published and in the public domain, these are quite simply Obama’s lost years. ……
….There is almost nothing about his activity as a student, or about his mental life. The Associated Press ran up against the same wall: “The Obama campaign declined to discuss Obama’s time at Columbia and his friendships in general….”
Obama and Zbigniew Brzezinski at Columbia, 1981-1983
Brzezinski during these years was fresh from having directed the National Security Council during Jimmy Carter’s sole term in office. As we have seen elsewhere in this book, it was in precisely this period of the early 1980s that Brzezinski, Samuel Huntington, and other long-terms Trilateral planners were reflecting on the results of the Carter regime, while looking forward to wrecking and frustrating a general political upsurge in the United States (known in Huntington’s parlance as a creedal passion period) which they could already see on the horizon, and which they located at that time in the years between 2010 and 2030. It is safe to assume that Brzezinski and Huntington were also concerned with recruiting young political talent which they could develop, groom, indoctrinate and brainwash for various purposes, including that of political candidate, over the coming decades. Brzezinski and Huntington in short, were looking for political assets which they might employ during a quarter century perspective which was the framework for their future activity. Because of the strong Ford Foundation pedigree of Obama’s mother, young Barack would have been an obvious choice as the subject to be interviewed and vetted. The contention here is that Obama was recruited in the context of this effort, and since then, his career has been fostered and sponsored by the circles of the Trilateral Commission.
Zbigniew Brzezinski during these years was working as the boss of the Institute for Communist Affairs at Columbia – a notorious anti-Soviet think tank and propaganda center. What little we know about Obama includes that he was a politics major with a specialty in international relations who wrote his senior thesis on the topic of Soviet nuclear disarmament. This, needless to say, is a topic which Zbigniew Brzezinski written all over it.
Yet, Barack Obama at a point had publicly denied any association with Zbigniew Brzezinski for electoral gain. Watch the video here.
As for Barack Obama’s other interesting “liaisons”
…Instead, then, let us review a related subject – Obama’s connections and even indebtedness, throughout his career, to extremist Islam. Specifically, he has longstanding, if indirect ties to two institutions, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), listed by the U.S. government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-funding trial; and the Nation of Islam (NoI), condemned by the Anti-Defamation League for its “consistent record of racism and anti-Semitism.”
Read about Obama’s connections to extremist Islam in this article by Daniel Pipes.
Even so, it is worth asking “Why did President Obama refuse to support the demonstrators in Iran in 2009, but supported the “Arab Spring” in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere more recently?” as Pamela Geller did on her article for the American Thinker.
…Now the Foundation for Democracy in Iran has revealed that Hillary’s advisors on Iran included Trita Parsi.
Trita Parsi is the president of the George Soros-funded National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a powerful Iranian lobbying group in Washington. Arash Irandoost of the Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran calls Parsi “an intellectually dishonest regime apologist and an unofficial and unregistered lobbyist for the Iranian regime.” According to Irandoost, “Trita Parsi contributes to the regime’s agenda and serves the interests of those in power in the Islamic Republic of Iran, not the Iranians, nor the Iranian-Americans.”
And the Progressive American-Iranian Committee says that when NIAC and Parsi received funding for various projects from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), “NIAC’s projects were approved and welcomed by the Iranian regime.” NIAC coordinated its work inside Iran with Hamyaran, a “government initiated agency incepted, initiated, founded and managed by the Iranian regime.” NIAC and Parsi even lobbied the U.S. Congress to “stop appropriating funds for independent democratic movements and NGOs that were not under Hamyaran or regime’s control.”
Not surprisingly, Parsi opposes sanctions against the Islamic Republic, claiming that “imposing new sanctions prior to diplomacy having begun will only decrease the chances of successful diplomacy.” The NIAC has opposed sanctions for quite some time. Iranian dissident Hassan Daioleslam notes that “in 2008, when [the] U.S. Congress was showing some teeth to the Iranian regime,” a coalition of Islamic groups, antiwar groups, and others founded the Campaign for New American Policy on Iran to fight against new sanctions against Iran called for by the advisory resolution H.R. 362. This resolution was not passed, and “NIAC and Parsi,” says Daioleslam, “were on top of this event.”
No strike on Iran. No sanctions. Just diplomacy — with a genocidally inclined and fanatically intransigent regime whose contempt for Obama’s overtures made the president look increasingly beggarly as his presidency wore on.
Worth wondering why Obama has been this lenient in the case of Syria too. Well, first Syria is backed by Iran and secondly they would have to get the Russians out of their base in the port of Tartous. But, no worries, Brzezinski and his Manchurian Candidate are working their way to…. or better “around??” it….