Like Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Vatican has strongly OPPOSED the Iraq
War, a planned Iran War, and all the other crackbrained neocon schemes
for igniting Armageddon on behalf of building Greater Israel. The
closest allies of the neocons in the Christian world have been
Protestants, not Roman Catholics, and even they are not real
Protestants or real Christians -- they comprise a twisted and
genocidal Old Testament cult that is hostile to every core tenet of
the New Testament and the Gospels.
ZB is a globalist in the sense that any thinking person in the world
is a globalist these days -- because of contemporary transportation
and communications technologies and the rapid merging of social,
cultural and economic systems around the world, one must think
globally simply to understand what is going on in the real world.
Narrow nationalism, particular ethnic nationalism of the type
epitomized by Israel and Zionism, no longer cuts it.
Do you have any particular quotes from Brzezinski's writings you would
like to discuss or critique? Compared to the messianic neocons who
now control the Republican Party, and who engineered the Iraq War,
Brzezinski is the soul of sanity and reason. He's also an original
and imaginative thinker.
Main point: Webster Tarpley has seriously damaged his credibility with
this crazy essay.
*/Naila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:
I still say ZB could be a wolf in sheep's clothing with a
globalist agenda broader than mere support for Israel, or even a
particular war at a particular time (he said we'd need 500,000
more troops, which would necessitate a draft). The Zionist
question is just one of the faces of a many-faced monster which
include the Papacy, the Jesuits, the restoration of the Holy Roman
Empire, the restoration of the British Empire, and the powerful
secret societies that unite the participants. Interestingly, ZB
is a great friend of the Pope despite his belief in a more
"rational" world view that goes beyond religion (It's never been
about God -- IMHO, quite the opposite).
Naila
* * *
Excerpt from "The Hidden Face of Terrorism"
© by Paul David Collins © 2002
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/15-nov-2004.html
. . .The story of the dreaded al-Qa'ida terrorist network begins
with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security
Advisor. In his 1997 book, /The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy
and Geostrategic Objectives/, Brzezinski provides readers with the
motivation for the creation of a terrorist threat. He begins (p.
xii):
/The last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic
shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian
power has emerged not only as a key arbiter of Eurasian power
relations but also as the world's paramount. The defeat and
collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid
ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as
the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power ... /
Brzezinski celebrates the fact that America is being transformed
into a world empire. However, he identifies a distinct threat to
America's ascendancy to the position of sole global power: "The
attitude of the American public toward the external projection of
American power has been much more ambivalent" (p. 24). Apparently,
the citizenry's aversion towards imperialistic policies, which
Brzezinski euphemistically interprets as ambivalence, is an
obstacle to the empire's expansion. After all, there are still
plenty of patriots who understand that Brzezinski's expansionistic
"geostrategy" is irreconcilable with the tenets of Americanism.
This sense of awareness has been a major obstacle to the foreign
policy elites that Brzezinski represents. Thus far, enough
patriots know that none of the "Freedom Documents" (i.e., the
Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) makes concessions for the
arbitrary extension of America's authority through brutish
military expeditions. As a sovereign nation itself, America is
supposed to honour the autonomy of other countries and is not to
initiate militaristic campaigns unless she is threatened. Yet,
Brzezinski believes that adherence to such principles could
provoke worldwide social upheaval (p. 30):
/America's withdrawal from the world, or because of the sudden
emergence of a successful rival, would produce massive
international instability. It would promote global anarchy. /
Brzezinski continues further on in hyperbolic fashion (p. 194):
/Without sustained and directed American involvement, before long
the forces of global disorder could come to dominate the world
scene. /
In other words, the promotion and practice of representative
government amongst other nations would lead to doomsday itself. In
such statements, the former National Security Advisor reveals the
authoritarian features of his bizarre eschatology. According to
Brzezinski's /Weltanschauung/, those who cherish individual
liberties and the sovereignty of their respective nations
constitute the "forces of global disorder"; these forces must be
defeated or they will invariably cause the apocalypse--so public
opinion must be altered. (Brzezinski fails to mention that such a
doomsday will only mean the end for him and his elitist comrades.)
Brzezinski cites a very interesting historical example (p. 25):
/The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely
because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. /
Ah, an option presents itself! Mass consensus could be facilitated
through mass trauma. In fact, the engineering of widespread
compliance is an essential constituent in the implementation of
Brzezinski's foreign policy. In an exemplary moment of
self-incrimination so endemic to elitist tracts, Brzezinski pens a
damning confession (p. 211):
/Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural
society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on
foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly
massive and widely perceived direct external threat. /
A readily exploitable menace, whether genuine or promulgated, is
the solution.
Brzezinski began the construction of his "direct external threat"
years before he wrote /The Grand Chessboard/. In an interview with
the French magazine /Le Nouvel Observateur/, the former national
security adviser made a stunning confession that will change the
history books forever (Blum, p. 1):
/Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his
memoirs [From the Shadows] that American intelligence services
began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan six months before the
Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security
adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this
affair. Is that correct?/
/Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history,
CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after
the Soviet Army invaded Afghanistan, December 24, 1979. But the
reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise.
Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the
first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet
regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the
President in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid
was going to induce a Soviet military intervention./
/Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action.
But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and
looked to provoke it?/
/B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene,
but we knowingly increased the probability that they would. /
Re-education and the Creation of the Taliban
Having encouraged the Soviets to invade Afghanistan, Brzezinski
now had a pretext for radicalising and arming a population that
would be used at a future date as a "direct external threat" to
the United States.
Part of the radicalisation process included the brainwashing of
children under the guise of education. The Washington Post's Joe
Stephens and David B. Ottaway report (pp. 1-2):
/In the twilight of the Cold War, the United States spent millions
of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled
with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert
attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation. /
/The "Primers", which were filled with talk of jihad and featured
drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since
then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the
Taliban used the American-produced books, though the radical
movement scratched out human faces in keeping with its strict
fundamentalist code. . .
/
