“Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security advisor to president Carter, is now Obama foreign policy consultant.
BRZEZINSKI’S NEOLIBERAL GEOSTRATEGIC ANALYSES HAVE STRONGLY INFLUENCED U.S. IMPERIALISM AND THE WORLD IT RULES. . THE ‘NEOCONS’ TACTICALLY SHIFTED COURSE CONVINCED THAT UNDER BUSH, THE POST-SOVIET WORLD PROVIDED A SMALL WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY TO GO FOR BROKE, GRAB IT ALL AT ONCE.
“BRZEZINSKI DIDN’T OPENLY CLASH WITH PNAC, BUT, WITH HUGE CAPITALIST ‘AID’, INCLUDING GEORGE SOROS’ ‘MOVE ON’, LAID THE GROUNDWORK FOR A ‘WELL PRIMED NEW WORLD ORDER LEADER’ AS KISSINGER DESCRIBED OBAMA.
“BRZEZINSKI SHEDS UNUSUALLY STARK ‘INSIDER’ LIGHT ON THE HEGEMONIC PLAYERS & OBJECTIVES METICULOUSLY BURIED UNDER BIG LIES BY STRATEGIC INFORMATION ‘NEWS’. TO SAVE THE SHIP OF STATE, MEDIA FRAMES EVERYTHING POLITICAL IN REDUCTIONIST, MIND-FUCKING PARTISAN politics, FOCUS ON NON-SUBSTANTIVE POLITICIANS/POLICIES TACTICAL DIFFERENCES, TO ‘DISAPPEAR’ THE WORLD-ORDERING & DESTROYING FINANCE CAPITALIST POLITICAL-ECONOMIC SYSTEM – WHICH CAN ONLY BE SUBSTANTIVELY & FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED BY GENUINE REVOLUTION (which U.S. ‘revolutions’ are designed to avert), NOT BY ELECTORAL-FACE-CHANGES.”
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Geostrategic Imperatives,
Zbigniew Brzezinski, 1997
“For the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with America’s twin interests: the short-term preservation of its unique global power and the long-run transformation of it into an increasingly institutionalized global cooperation.
“To put it in terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”
“Brzezinski brags about relatively unknown CIA Intervention in Afghanistan BEFORE, to provoke soviet invasion:
Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser
Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998
Question: 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 6 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, 24 Dec 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.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites Christian countries.”
Much more at: