Obama, Brzezinski, and the Neolib-Neocon Family Feud

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Sep 15, 2007.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Let’s call Barack Obama what he is—a sock puppet for the ruling elite. Obama made this plainly obvious recently when he tabbed Zbigniew Brzezinski as his top foreign policy adviser. In addition to his affiliations with the Council on Foreign Relations (as director), the Trilateral Commission, and the National Endowment for Democracy, Brzezinski was the architect of Carter’s Afghanistan policy, that it to say he is responsible for killing thousands of innocents and organizing the Afghan Arabs, later to become “al-Qaeda.” It is said David Rockefeller asked Brzezinski to create the Trilateral Commission and details were hammered out at Rockefeller’s Pocantico Hills estate outside New York City. Rockefeller later introduced the idea to the Bilderberg group in Knokke, Belgium in the spring of 1972.

    As author Holly Sklar has noted, in “1973 the Trilateral Commission was founded by David Rockefeller, Chase Manhattan Bank chairman, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s national security advisor, and other like-minded ‘eminent private citizens.’ Some 300 members (up from about 200 members in 1973) are drawn from international business and banking, government, academia, media, and conservative labor. The Commission’s purpose is to engineer an enduring partnership among the ruling classes of North American, Western Europe, and Japan—hence the term ‘trilateral’—in order to safeguard the interests of Western capitalism in an explosive world. The private Trilateral Commission is attempting to mold public policy and construct a framework for international stability in the coming decades. Throughout this book, ‘trilateralism’ refers to the doctrine of world order advanced by the Commission” (Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, Edited by Holly Sklar, South End Press, 1980).

    “Upon reading the 1970 book Between Two Ages, David Rockefeller lured its writer, Professor Zbigniew Brzezinski, away from Columbia University to become the Chairman and co-founder of the Trilateral Commission,” writes Eric Barger (The New World Order Under Clinton: Establishment Insiders and Political Deceit, The Christian World Report, May 1993, pg. 7.) “Brzezinski, who later became the mastermind of Jimmy Carter’s foreign affairs and national security blunders, is still looked to as a policy guru by the liberal media today. Using the same socialist mindset, objectives and premise as the CFR, the TC sprang from, and was purposely patterned after, Brzezinski’s book in 1973.”

    In other words, Brzezinski is a consummate insider and enthusiastic proponent of world government, that is to say he has worked long and diligently for the plan to transform the world into a corporate slave plantation and mega-sweatshop.

    Thus it makes perfect sense Barack Obama, billed as one of “10 people who could change the world,” according to the New Statesman, has invited Zbigniew Brzezinski aboard, or rather was told by his globalist handlers to invite him. “For Brzezinski, 79, support for Obama means support for a radical change in direction of American foreign policy,” writes MSNBC. In other words, neolibs of Brzezinski’s ilk have lost patience with the chest-pounding neocons.

    “These neocon prescriptions, of which Israel has its equivalents, are fatal for America and ultimately for Israel,” Brzezinski told Nathan Gardels, editor-in-chief of the journal of social and political thought published by Blackwell/Oxford and Global Services of the Los Angeles Times Syndicate/Tribune.

    “They will totally turn the overwhelming majority of the Middle East’s population against the United States. The lessons of Iraq speak for themselves. Eventually, if neo-con policies continue to be pursued, the United States will be expelled from the region and that will be the beginning of the end for Israel as well.”

    <snip>

    “Neoconservatives and neoliberals are really quite similar, so it doesn’t matter who gets elected in 2008. The American public, weary of preemptive attacks, democracy-promotion, and nation-building, will still get war either way,” writes Philip Giraldi. As Ronald D. Asmus and Kenneth M. Pollack write for the CIA’s favorite newspaper, the Washington Post, “Neoliberals, among whom we number ourselves, believe in political preemption first and military preemption only as a last resort. We supported the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq because we concluded that force was the only way to lance these boils. But force will not work as a normal tool of policy or social engineering in the Middle East. Our goal must be to have the Arabs embrace democracy and modernization, not to force it down their throats.”


    In other words, the neolibs believe in the tried and true method of making certain corrupt leaders are installed—consider, as primary examples, the Shah of Iran, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, and the monarchies in Saudi Arabia and Jordan—and accomplishing what the neocons are slogging through by way of proxy, albeit less dramatically and at a slower pace. Of course, the main difference is that the Israel-centric neocons, like their Jabotinskyite collaborators, hate Arabs and Muslims, whereas the neolibs are indifferent and far more interested in doing the bidding of the bankers, the IMF and World Bank, transnational corporations, that is to say advancing the process of “free trade” (as in unhindered looting and plunder) as well as ushering in world government, a process long envisioned by Brzezinski’s mentor, David Rockefeller.


    SOURCE

    World government by any other name...or means is still world government. These one worlders might as well stand out in the public square chanting "Death To America" because they're the ones killing it.
     
    #1 poncho, Sep 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2007
  2. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Bump......
     
  3. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Ziggy seems like a nice guy personally

    Ziggy seems like a nice guy personally but politically he is a disaster. I listen to him but take him with a grain of salt.

    The idea that the establishment is all in cahoots has been around for some years now. I think that there are a lot of differences between the 2 parties on foreign policy. Democrats tend to think that diplomacy works without soldiers and favor the UN. The GOP under Ike used the slogan peace through strenght and I think that that slogan still decribes the GOP foreign policy of having a strong military to protect global American interests.

    It is true that Easterners have dominated for many years, but that has started to change, as the East Coast is earmarked by big crowds, high prices, and a lot of litter and dirt.

    As for the idea that some of our friends abroad have not been too nice, I suppose that you have to say that what you lose on the bananas you make up on the peaches. Look at our good friend President Uribe of Colombia--he makes up for Castro and Chavez and Morales in Bolivia. Even President Calderon of Mexico is a free market man, and then there is a good man in Peru, Alan Garcia. So the spirit of the great Simon Bolivar may be still alive in South America in spite of all the leftist.
     
  4. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    It's no surprise to me that you favor a right wing new world order CMG. But I have to keep wondering just what it is about the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights and the idea of a sovereign United States that you find so worrisome and dangerous.
     
  5. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Chihuahua

    Chihuahau, Poncho, how do you get that I favor a right-wing new world order? I favor a Christian worldview. The US Constitution has been described as all sail and no anchor. I think the proof of that statement all sail and no anchor is shown by the Dred Scott decision and Roe v. Wade. I think that rights come from God, not the government, and the bill of rights has not stopped persecution of Christians here in America, as you know.

    I just think that we live in an international world, like it or not, and that the USA has a right to protect our interests internationally. I just don't believe that David Rockefeller is a threat to anyone because of his age and his relative poverty when compared to the fortunes in Hollywood and the fortunes of people like Bill Gates and Carlos Slim, the richest man in the world.

    OK?
     

Share This Page

Loading...