- Washington, DC, July 17, 2008 -- With the Bush regime
sending a top State Department diplomat to sit down with Iranian officials,
with signs that the US departure from Iraq may now be accelerated, and
with Israel beginning to make deals with Hezbollah, some observers in this
capital are beginning to celebrate Peace in Our Time in an outburst of
midsummer euphoria. But this perspective is an illusion: the United States
and NATO now escalating the hopeless and unwinnable Afghan war, and is
preparing to send US and NATO forces on the ground to seize parts of Pakistan,
a country which is almost 3 times more populous than Iran, and possesses
a nuclear arsenal and the means to deliver it. The Bush-Cheney-neocon
era in foreign policy is over, and the Brzezinski-Trilateral-Rockefeller-Soros
phase of aggression has begun; the US hit list now features Chinese allies
like Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Pakistan. Brzezinski is striving to put together
some huge provocation for the Beijing Olympics, to make the Chinese government
lose face and begin disintegrating. The ultimate targets of the new Obama-Brzezinski
foreign policy are Russia, China, and the other members and friends of
the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the main pole of resistance in the
world to the designs of Washington and London. The stakes are now much
higher than a mere conventional clash in the Persian Gulf. Brzezinski's
adventurism goes far beyond that of the neocons, and objectively places
the danger of a thermonuclear exchange on the world agenda. Watch for the
Polish-Czech-Lithuanian missile crisis, a Balkan crisis, and a crisis between
Georgia and Russia to point the world in this ominous new direction.
-
- The US government is now being run by the Principals'
Committee, an interagency cabal that includes Defense Secretary Gates,
Secretary Of State Rice, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen, Secretary of the
Treasury Paulson, and other operatives of the Trilateral Wall Street financier
faction. It is clear that under the new policy, Iran will be able to continue
to process uranium: 'The Bush administration's decision to send a senior
American official to participate in international talks with "More
news and information about Iran." Iran this weekend reflects a double
policy shift in the struggle to resolve the impasse over the country's
nuclear program. First, the Bush administration has decided to abandon
its longstanding position that it would meet face to face with Iran only
after that country suspended its uranium enrichment, as demanded by the
"More articles about Security Council, U.N." United Nations Security
Council. Second, an American partner at the table injects new importance
to the negotiating track of the six global powers confronting Iran - France,
Britain, Germany, Russia, China and the United States - even though their
official stance is that no substantive talks can begin until uranium enrichment
stops. The increased engagement raised questions of whether the Bush administration
would alter its stance toward Iran as radically as it did with North Korea,
risking a fresh schism with conservatives who have accused the White House
of granting concessions to so-called rogue states without extracting enough
in return.' (New York Times, July 17, 2008) This gambit of appeasing Iran
is being done in the hopes of turning Iran against Russia and China
a project of incalculable folly. Brzezinski is glad to see the Iranians
have nukes, because he thinks he can keep them, pointed at Moscow.
-
- At the same time, US and NATO forces are getting ready
for a large-scale invasionof Pakistan, with the excuse of catching the
phantomatic Bin Laden. The real goal is to so humiliate and discredit the
current US puppet regime in Pakistan that the country will descend intom
civilwar and split apart, destroying a key Chinese ally in the proicess.
The timetable is short: 'ISLAMABAD, July 13 (Reuters) - The Chairman of
the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, visited Pakistan on
the weekend, fueling speculation that the United States was about to take
action against militants in northwest Pakistan.' Even troops of other NATO
states are getting ready to attack Pakistan: 'KABUL, July 16 (Reuters)
- NATO forces in Afghanistan hit targets inside Pakistan with artillery
and attack helicopters after coming under rocket fire from across the border,
the alliance said on Wednesday. Tension is high along the border with a
sharp rise in attacks in eastern Afghanistan coming from inside Pakistan
that Afghan and NATO officials blame on de-facto ceasefires between the
Pakistani military and militants in its lawless tribal belt. (Reuters North
American News Service, July 16, 2008) All of which goes to show that Brzezinski
is mad as a hatter.
-
- THE BRZEZINSKI-OBAMA PLAN FOR RUSSIA
-
- Groaning under the weight of two lost wars, the terminal
crisis of the US dollar, banking panic, and hyperinflation, the US ruling
elite is attempting to unify itself around Obama for a breathtaking reversal
of their entire strategic and ideological field. The intent is to largely
jettison the post-9/11 enemy image of Islamic terrorism and the focus on
the Middle East, and to shift target to Russia, China, and their allies
in a vast global showdown or planetary end game for which Trilateral asset
Obama is supposed to be the figurehead. As outlined by the cold warrior
and Russia-hater Brzezinski, the first phase is to eject the Chinese from
Africa, cutting off their access to oil and raw materials, and thus sabotaging
their current rapid industrial development. All of Africa is rapidly becoming
a battlefield of the US against the Chinese, and Obama is the ideal front
man for this. Chinese allies like Sudan and Zimbabwe, and also Pakistan
and Burma, are all being targeted as part of this plan. With Iran and Syria,
the effort will not to attack them, but to turn them against Russia and
China. This Brzezinski design is why Obama says he wants to negotiate with
Iran, but bomb Pakistan. China is being weakened and destabilized by the
Tibetan insurrection and other operations, and Zbig would like to stage
a large-scale incident under the cover of the summer Olympics. In the final
stage, Zbig thinks he can drive the oil-starved Chinese in on Russia's
provinces of eastern Siberia, where there is much oil and few Russians.
Obama is thus the bearer of a plan for Sino-Russian World War III that
far surpasses the insanity of the neocons. Since Russia and China are both
well aware of the Brzezinski plan, this entire lunatic project is sure
to blow up in our faces, with cataclysmic results. The Iraq war will seem
a tea party by comparison. The main grounds for aggression in the new phase
will be humanitarian and human rights claims, not terrorism, so as to maximize
left cover. The Bin Laden pretext is now mainly for Afghanistan-Pakistan,
where the existing war is being expanded and re-directed to fit the new
policy.
-
- OBAMA ESCALATES AFGHANISTAN, ATTACKS PAKISTAN
-
- An example of the heightened aggressiveness that could
be expected under the Brzezinski plan was the question of unilateral US
bombing of Pakistan. Not a few observers spent the first half of 2008
worrying about an imminent attack on Iran. The reality was that the growing
power of the Brzezinski faction in Washington made such an attack less
and less likely, at least as far as the United States and the United Kingdom
were concerned. But these same observers were largely blind to a program
of systematic aggression being carried out by the United States and the
British against Pakistan, a country that was almost 3 times larger than
Iran, and became equipped with nuclear weapons and medium-range ballistic
missiles to deliver them. Every gust of wind in the Persian Gulf was considered
a harbinger of Armageddon, but the constant bombing raids in the northwest
regions of Pakistan were considered a matter of scant importance.
-
- The irony was that the bombing attacks on Pakistan had
been demanded by none other than Obama. Speaking indeed the July 2008
Democratic candidates' debate held in Chicago, Obama had stated: ' what
I said was that we have to refocus, get out of Iraq, make certain that
we are helping Pakistan deal with the problem of al Qaeda in the hills
between Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, if we have actionable intelligence
on al Qaeda operatives, including bin Laden, and President Musharraf cannot
act, then we should. Now, I think that's just common sense. I don't know
about you, but for us to authorize -- (cheers, applause) -- (inaudible)
--.' Senator Clinton had disagreed with this reckless and unilateral approach.
Senator Dodd had joined Clinton in criticizing Obama. Senator McCain had
scored Obama for making such a reckless and incendiary proposal. Even
Bush himself stated that he intended to work closely with President Musharraf
in regard to all operations conducted by the United States on Pakistani
territory.
-
- Since the tenant of the White House had ruled out the
unilateral bombing of Pakistan which Obama had demanded, the matter appeared
to be closed. Jake Tapper of ABC News found it striking that Obama, who
was posing as the peace candidate for Iraq, should be so aggressive in
regard to Pakistan. Tapper showed that Obama was raising the issue on the
campaign trail, quoting him. '"I understand that President Musharraf
has his own challenges," Obama said, "but let me make this clear.
There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans.
They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to
act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in
2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets
and President Musharraf won't act, we will." There it was again: unilateral
US bombing of a sovereign state that had nuclear weapons. Tapper commented:
'In many ways, the speech is counterintuitive; Obama, one of the more liberal
candidates in the race, is proposing a geopolitical posture that is more
aggressive than that of President Bush.' (Jake Tapper, 'Presidential Candidate
Pushes Aggressive Stance Toward Pakistan,' ABC News, August 1, 2007) In
other words, when it came to Pakistan, Obama was a bigger warmonger and
any Republican or Democrat in sight, including Bush and McCain, to say
nothing of Clinton.
-
- Astoundingly, the power of Brzezinski in Washington grew
so rapidly that Obama was destined to prevail over Bush, the alleged president,
imposing his policy instead of the announced intentions of the man who
kept calling himself the president of the United States. Late in March
2008, a press account revealed that the US had indeed gone over to unilaterally
bombing northwest Pakistan: 'The United States has escalated its unilateral
strikes against al-Qaeda members and fighters operating in "Pakistan's
tribal areas, partly because of anxieties that Pakistan's new leaders will
insist on scaling back military operations in that country, according to
U.S. officials. "We have always said that as for strikes, that is
for Pakistani forces to do and for the Pakistani government to decide.
. . . We do not envision a situation in which foreigners will enter Pakistan
and chase targets," said Farhatullah Babar, a top spokesman for the
"Pakistan People's Party, whose leader, Yousaf Raza Gillani, is the
new prime minister. "This war on terror is our war." But Kamran
Bokhari, a Pakistani who directs Middle East analysis for Strategic Forecasting,
a private intelligence group in Washington, said the new government will
almost certainly take a harder line against such strikes. "These .
. . are very unpopular, not because people support al-Qaeda, but because
they feel Pakistan has no sovereignty," he said. The latest Predator
strike, on March 16, killed about 20 in Shahnawaz Kot; a Feb. 28 strike
killed 12 foreign militants in the village of Kaloosha; and a Jan. 29 strike
killed 13 people, including senior al-Qaeda commander Abu Laith al-Libi,
in North Waziristan. (Robin Wright and Joby Warrick, :US Steps Up Unilateral
Strikes in Pakistan," Washington Post, March 27, 2008)
-
- Soon it became clear that this was a systematic US bombing
campaign and represented a scandal as big in its own way as the Nixon-Kissinger
secret bombing of Cambodia back in the early 1970s. This is no hyperbole;
we must simply remember that a nuclear power, and not some banana republic,
is being attacked! The US bombing campaign was being conducted with wild
and reckless abandon, and members of Pakistani paramilitary formations
were getting killed: 'Pakistan is condemning a "Pakistan: US airstrikes
kill 11 border troops" U.S. air strike which allegedly killed 11 Pakistani
paramilitaries as a "completely unprovoked and cowardly act."
U.S.-led forces killed Pakistani troops in an air strike along the volatile
Afghan border that Pakistan's army condemned on Wednesday as "completely
unprovoked and cowardly." U.S. officials confirmed that three aircraft
launched about a dozen bombs following a clash between Taliban militants
and Afghan and U.S.-led coalition forces late Tuesday. Pakistan says the
strikes killed 11 of its paramilitary troops. The Pakistani army said the
air strike hit a post of the paramilitary Frontier Corps in the Mohmand
tribal region and was a "completely unprovoked and cowardly act."
It launched a strong protest and reserved "the right to protect our
citizens and soldiers against aggression," the military said in a
statement. The statement said the clash "had hit at the very basis
of cooperation" between the allies in the war on terror.'
-
- The Pakistani government was now the one elected in the
elections conducted after the death of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007.
This was supposedly the regime the US had wanted to install, but Brzezinski
was doing everything possible to humiliate, mortified, and thoroughly antagonize
the new government in Islamabad. 'The Frontier Post of Pakistan reported:
'On June 10, 2008 US - led coalition forces along the Afghan border launched
an air strike on a Frontier Corps Sheikh Baba border post in the mountainous
Gora Prai region in Mohmand Agency. 11 Pakistani paramilitary troops including
one major, 10 civilian killed and several injured. The incident took place
inside Pakistan, near the border with Afghanistan. Pentagon confirmed that
coordinated artillery and air strikes was carried out. On Jun 11 2008,
Prime Minister Gilani condemned the deaths, telling parliament: "We
will take a stand for the sake of this country's sovereignty, for the sake
of its dignity and self-respect". He further revealed that "We
do not allow our territory to be used. We completely condemn this, and
will take it up through the foreign office."("NATO's Senseless
Aggressiveness in FATA," Frontier Post) By early July 2008, the US
was making preparations to escalate: 'US commandos are reportedly poised
to launch raids against al-Qa'ida and Taliban targets in Pakistan as Washington
moves an aircraft carrier into the Arabian Sea. The redeployment of the
Abraham Lincoln and its escort vessels from the Gulf yesterday came after
US military intelligence officials recorded an increase in the number of
foreign fighters travelling to Pakistan's tribal areas to join with militants.'
-
- What is Brzezinski doing? He is obviously using the
absurd pretext of bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban in order to destroy
the central government of Pakistan, and promote civil war, Balkanization,
partitioning, and subdivision in that country. The goal is evidently the
division of Pakistan into three or four or five petty states, including
such areas as Sind, Pushtunistan, Baluchistan, Waziristan, and so forth.
This operation has nothing whatsoever to do with bin Laden, Al Qaeda,
the Taliban, or the "global war on terror," but had everything
to do with the fact that Pakistan was a traditional Chinese ally and economic
and trading partner. Pakistan had to be destroyed as part of the Brzezinski
strategy to strip China of all of allies, and promote the isolation and
encirclement of the Middle Kingdom. Northwest Pakistan is one of the very
few parts of the world where the US continued to rely on the bin Laden-Al
Qaeda myth to justify its policy. Elsewhere, pretexts and cover stories
about humanitarian intervention and human rights, and nuclear non-proliferation,
are on the front burner.
-
- GOP LAMENTS: LAME DUCK BUSH REDUCED TO CHILD'S PLAY
-
- In the late spring and early summer of 2008, it is clear
that Bush, Cheney, and the neocons had indeed lost power to Brzezinski
and company. Bush and Cheney appear to have about as much power as the
White House janitor or the groundskeeper at the Naval Observatory. Bush
and Cheney are variously described as finished, washed up, lame ducks,
figureheads, and kaput. Some Republicans were becoming concerned that Bush
had lapsed into a figurehead-lame-duck status, and impotence and passivity
so extreme that they might become a negative factor for McCain in the upcoming
election. One columnist noted: 'Some of President Bush's allies tell the
Political Bulletin they are embarrassed and angry that the White House
seems to be wasting Bush's time on frivolous events when much of the country
is suffering through economic hard times. "Look at the schedule for
Monday," says an outside Bush adviser. "A highlight of his day
was witnessing a tee ball game. ... He is being reduced to child's play."
The adviser says Bush also signed a supplemental appropriations bill for
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on Monday, but he adds that it didn't
get much coverage and that the tee ball game set the wrong tone. There
is growing concern among Bush allies that the Democrats will effectively
portray the President and GOP candidate John McCain as out of touch. Some
GOP insiders now predict that the Republicans will lose at least five seats
in the Senate and 15 to 20 in the House, and it could get worse if gasoline
prices continue to soar and the public remains in a disgruntled mood.'
-
- RICE HUMILIATES CHENEY WITH NORTH KOREA DEAL
-
- Another leading symptom of this loss of power by Bush
and Cheney is the announcement by Secretary of State Rice, another member
of the Principals' Committee, that a deal has been reached with North Korea
concerning the termination of the North Korean nuclear weapons program,
in exchange for which the United States had pledged to remove North Korea
from the State Department list of terrorist states. The remaining neocons
were apoplectic to the point of foaming at the mouth. The British press
revealed that the diehard Cheney had fought tooth and nail to block this
deal, but had been vanquished by Rice -- and thus by the superior power
of the Principals' Committee, in our view: 'Vice President Dick Cheney
fought furiously to block efforts by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
to strike a controversial US compromise deal with North Korea over the
communist state's nuclear program Mr Cheney was so angry about the decision
to remove North Korea from the terrorism blacklist and lift some sanctions
that he abruptly curtailed a meeting with visiting US foreign experts when
asked about it in the White House last week, according to the New York
Times "I'm not going to be the one to announce this decision. You
need to address your interest in this to the State Department," he
reportedly said before leaving the room. "The exchanges between Cheney's
office and Rice's people at State got very testy. But ultimately Condi
had the President's ear and persuaded him that his legacy would be stronger
if they reached a deal with Pyongyang," said a Pentagon adviser who
was briefed on the battle. Top neocon John Bolton was beside himself with
rage, and saw this deal with the DPRK as a harbinger of the final neocon
Götterdämmerung: '"It's shameful," said John Bolton,
Bush's former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "This represents
the final collapse of Bush's foreign policy." (CBS-AP, June 26, 2008)
The mood of his fellow neocon Richard Perle was equally apocalyptic: '"Usually
the word 'meltdown' applies to a nuclear reactor. In this case it applies
to Bush administration diplomacy which once aimed to halt the North Korean
program and has now become an abject failure," Richard Perle, chairman
of the Pentagon defense policy board in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion,
told the Telegraph.' (Daily Telegraph, June 28, 2008) Both Bolton and Perel,
for once, have it right. Brzezinski and his tool Rice are running the show.
-
- MULLEN WARNS ISRAELIS: DON'T ATTACK IRAN
-
- At the same time, a pattern of intense diplomatic activity
has emerged across the Middle East, even as the Israeli politician Shaul
Mofaz was threatening Iran with an inevitable nuclear attack if it were
to persevere in its alleged attempts to procure nuclear bombs. The Israelis
are known to be negotiating with Syria in a series of talks mediated by
the Turkish government. The Israelis were also making deals with Hamas
and Hezbollah, something that was formally speaking a violation of the
strict Bush doctrine in this regard. Remarkably, the top levels of the
US government have issued some unusual warnings to the Israelis, telling
them to back off from any plan to strike at Iran: President Bush and the
top "U.S. Armed Forces" U.S. military commander warned "Israel"
Israel... against bombing Iran, suggesting the " U.S. doesn't want
to get involved in a third war. "This is a very unstable part of the
world and I don't need it to be more unstable," "Michael G.
Mullen" Adm. Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman [and leading member
of the ruling Principals' Committee], said at a briefing. Bush said, "I
have made it clear to all parties [including Israel] that the first option
is diplomacy," in getting Iran to stop enriching uranium that could
be used for a nuclear weapon. The warnings came after the disclosure that
Israel had conducted air operations over the Mediterranean that could simulate
a strike on Iran.'
-
- In addition to these public warnings, there are also
reports of private messages telling the Israelis to back off. One was personally
delivered by Admiral Mullen of the Principals' Committee, according to
the Israeli press: 'The US did not give the green light for an Israeli
attack on Iran, Prof. Anthony H. Cordesman, a former Pentagon official
and currently the top defense analyst at the ABC TV network, said Monday.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen. Cordesman was speaking during
a meeting with Israeli defense analysts held by the Institute of National
Security Studies. He said IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi
was notified of the United States' stance regarding Iran by Admiral Michael
Mullen, the top uniformed US military officer, during Mullen's visit here
at the end of June. The US has opted at this point to stick to the diplomatic
track in its efforts to keep Iran from going nuclear, and has made clear
to Israel that it shouldn't attack Iran without White House approval, Cordesman
said. He added that the current US policy is likely to remain unchanged
at least until the next US president is sworn in. Israeli officials confirmed
that Cordesman's statements indeed reflected the current tone of US policy.'
-
- There are solid indications that Iran is being offered
the possibility of continuing to enrich uranium at the level of its present
capacity to do so, while opening a negotiation with Javier Solana of the
European Union. This was welcomed by the Iran Foreign Minister Mottaki,
and was widely regarded as the prelude to a deal or modus vivendi between
the US under Brzezinski and the Iranians: ''Iran agreed to enter into talks
with the European Union about its nuclear program before the end of the
month, Iranian state-run media said. The EU, which recently placed sanctions
on Iran, has offered a package of political, economic and security incentives
to Iran if it halts uranium enrichment. Iran's top nuclear negotiator,
Saeed Jalili, called EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana to tell him
the response to that offer was coming, according to Iran's Islamic Republic
News Agency, and Solana's office characterized Jalili's tone as friendly
and positive.
-
- The EU has proposed suspending further sanctions if
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Iran" Iran takes a six-week break
from installing or manufacturing any more centrifuges that enrich uranium.
Iran would be allowed to continue to run the more than 3,000 centrifuges
it already has but could not manufacture more ("Iran ready to discuss
EU's nuclear offer," CNN, July 4, 2008) In the midst of these negotiations,
Iran launched a number of medium and short range ballistic missiles. The
neocons tried to beat the drum, but the response of Secretary Gates of
the Principals' Committee was as low-key and placid as could be imagined:
'The United States is no closer to confrontation with Iran after Tehran
test-fired missiles it says could reach Israel and U.S. assets in the Middle
East, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday. Asked if the United
States was any closer to confrontation, Gates told reporters: "No,
I don't think so." Gates also said it was "highly unlikely"
that Russian air defense missiles would be in Iranian hands soon. An improved
air defense system would make a strike on Iran more difficult.' (Reuters:
"Pentagon chief: US no closer to Iran confrontation," July 9,
2008) Gates also mentioned the terrible consequences which any hostilities
with Iran would have. The following day, there were press reports that
the US was allowing the Israelis to use Iraqi airspace to ready an attack
on Iran. These reports were quickly denied by the Pentagon. An Israeli
attack could not be ruled out, but there was no doubt that the US and the
British were strongly opposed to the idea, which would undercut Brzezinski's
entire plan to turning Iran against the Russians.
-
- There was yet another example of a Principals' Committee
member overriding Bush and making policy. On July 11, 2008, it was reported
that Treasury Secretary Paulson had convinced Bush that the administration
policy of hostility (based on Bush's hatred of FDR and the New Deal in
any form) to Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, the twin giant mortgage guarantors
and lenders whose debts amounted to some $5.3 trillion, was risking a systemic
crisis of the US banking system a financial Armageddon. Paulson reportedly
told Bush that if he insisted on driving Freddie and Fannie into bankruptcy
liquidation, systemic crisis would quickly follow and Bush would be Hooverized
in very short order, long before he left office. At this point, wheels
were set into motion and the Federal Reserve signaled that Freddie and
Fannie would get access to the discount window of the US central bank.
This story is highly relevant here because it shows the degree to which
the members of the Principals Committee are now running the government
and telling Bush what to do on most the major issues. It is clear that
Brzezinski and his fellow Trilateral oligarchs intend to maintain and consolidate
the current preeminence of the Principals' Committee under a possible future
Obama administration, and also if McCain becomes president, although that
variant is much less promising for their hopes of giving US imperialism
a hyper-demagogic facelift. In the case of McCain, the Trilateral inside
operative would be Ian Brzezinski, the neocon son of the clan patriarch,
who tells McCain what to say about world affairs.
-
- NEOCONS DISPLACED BY TRILATERALS, 2006-2008
-
- The erosion of neocon power had proceeded apace, starting
around the time of the 2006 US congressional elections. Around that time,
British intelligence began signaling the urgent necessity of shifting target
towards Russia by staging to bombastic intelligence circuses in the form
of the Politkovskaya murder and the Litvinenko radiation bomb affair, both
of which were immediately blamed on Russian President Putin. The British
also stepped up their subversion efforts inside the Russian Federation
under the cover of cultural exchanges conduit through the Foreign Office
front organization, the British Council. As a result of the new Democratic
majority in the Congress, the discredited neocon factional leader Rumsfeld
was forced out and replaced by Robert Gates, a Sovietologist who had served
as the Russophobe Zbigniew Brzezinski's office boy at the National Security
Council during 1977, 1978, and 1979. Gates had also been active in Brzezinski's
mujaheddin operations against the Soviets, operations which had been given
birth to the CIA Arab Legion, Al Qaeda. At the end of 2006, the report
of the Iraq study group, also known as the Baker-Hamilton commission, signaled
a change in oligarchical policy and with it the beginning of the end of
the neocon dominance in Washington.
-
- The Iraq study group recommended that there be no US
attack on Iran, and that negotiations with Syria and Iran be begun immediately.
James Baker, a former secretary of state under Bush the Elder, stated
explicitly that he had procured Syria as an ally for the United States
during the first Gulf War, and that he could do so again. Neocon press
organs screamed that Baker and Hamilton were "surrender monkeys,"
but the handwriting was now on the wall. The middle of the year saw the
fall of the crypto-neocon Tony Blair, a creature of Rupert Murdoch and
the last of the major European leaders who had cooperated with Bush and
the neocons to unleash the Iraq war in the first place. The last serious
attempt of the neocon faction to launch war with Iran probably occurred
at the end of August and the beginning of September 2007, when rogue forces
allied with Cheney in effect hijacked a B-52 intercontinental strategic
bomber carrying six nuclear armed cruise missiles, and flew it from North
Dakota to Louisiana. One of more of these missiles was probably destined
to join in the Israeli attack on Syria which occurred on September 6.
The fact that this B-52 was not allowed to proceed, and that a consensus
against letting it leaves the United States rapidly emerged in the higher
levels of the oligarchy, probably represented the last gasp of the US -
UK neocons as far as starting a wider war was concerned. Bush's outbursts
in October and November about World War III were partly directed against
Putin, and partly expressed his frustration that no strategic attacks on
Iran were likely.
-
- This overall impression was solidified in December 2007
with the issuance of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which
concluded that there was no longer any active Iranian program to build
nuclear bombs. In 2008, attention was already shifting to such classic
Brzezinski gambits as Kosovo independence and the emerging Polish missile
crisis, along with the Tibet insurrection, threats to attack Sudan, and
a clear desire to use a humanitarian emergency in Burma as a pretext for
a humanitarian invasion and regime change because the Burmese junta was
not an efficient distributor of relief supplies. In these same months,
the US Supreme Court was handing down majority opinions striking down the
Bush-Cheney military commissions plan for alleged terrorist captives, and
then asserting the right of habeas corpus for the prisoners being held
in the US exclave of Guantánamo Bay Cuba. Once again, the neocons
howled in their impotence. Then came the deal to de-list North Korea as
a terrorist state, followed by increasing indications of an imminent deal
with Iran, even as the attacks on Pakistan escalated and that country teetered
on the brink of civil war and partition.
-
- The years had not been kind to the neocons: Scooter Libby
had been convicted, and only escaped prison through bushes highly controversial
pardon. Lord Conrad Black, arguably an even bigger neocon then Libby,
was now actually serving a multi-year prison sentence in a US federal penitentiary
for embezzling money from his companies. Lord Black had been one of the
major funders of the American Enterprise Institute, where no less a personage
than Lynn Cheney, as well as Richard Perle and Michael Ledeen had been
employed. As for neocon Michael Ledeen, his problems might only be beginning:
a report from the Senate Intelligence Committee alleged that Ledeen and
his old Iran-Contra friend Ghorbanifar had conspired to manipulate US intelligence
during the run-up to the Iraq war. This report had no doubt received much
personal attention from the Committee Chairman, who was none other than
Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, of the Trilateral-Rockefeller faction which
also included Brzezinski. Other neocons like torture advocates and Geneva
Convention deniers Addington (Cheney's Cheney) Yoo were hauled in front
of the Nadler committee of the House to be grilled and lambasted. These
were some of the steps by which the Trilaterals had ousted the neocons
from their previous positions of power, had neutralized Bush and Cheney,
and had generally introduced a demagogic left turn in the entire posture
of Anglo American foreign policy, propaganda, and intelligence operations.
Now, all they needed was a figurehead to become the spokesman for this
deceptive and cynical left turn -- and this was obviously the role assigned
to Obama.
-
- If the American people could imagine no conflict worse
than the Iraq war, or even the now-unlikely Iran war, they were obviously
suffering from a severe poverty of imagination. Zbigniew Brzezinski's imagination
was richer than that. He could and did imagine a drive to break up both
Russia and China, reducing both to a congeries of warlords and petty states,
all absolutely impotent to resist the Anglo-Americans. That would give
London and Washington another century of world domination. Brzezinski would
always claim that his intention was to accomplish all this using proxies,
surrogates, and pawns, and without embroiling the US in direct war with
Russia and China. His approach had all the defects of the old Astor family-Cliveden
set of the 1930s, who were convinced that they could build up Hitler, turn
him east, play him against Stalin, and then destroy both Germany and the
USSR in the process, letting the British Empire survive for another hundred
years. Unfortunately, they had been too clever by half, and their plan
had blown up in their faces when Hitler turned west before going east.
That had caused World War II. Now, it was clear that Brzezinski's fantastic
strategy was also destined to blow up in his face, and in all our faces,
except now there are ICBMs and H-bombs. The Russian leader Vladimir Putin
and his faction clearly had read Brzezinski's intentions accurately: "Where
did you get a public opinion that we should fully disarm and then, according
to some theoreticians, such as Brzezinski, divide our territory into three
or four states? If there is such a public opinion, I would disagree with
it," Putin had stated on June 4, 2007.
-
- OBAMA A ONE-WAY TICKET TO THERMONUCLEAR WAR
-
- An Obama regime was therefore a probable one-way ticket
to thermonuclear war, an outcome several orders of magnitude worse than
anything the neocons had ever plotted. Brzezinski and his friends were
more aggressive, more adventurous, more intelligent, and more insane than
the neocons. The American people, if they succumbed to Obama, were about
to leap out of the frying pan and into the fire.
-
-
- http://www.cfr.org/publication/14004/democratic_debate_transcript_chicago.html
- http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3434573&page=1
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2
- 008/03/27/AR2008032700007_2.html?sid=ST2008032700935
- http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/06/us_airstrikes_kill_pakistani_troops/
- http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=194&ad=16-06-2008
- http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24000236-2703,00.html
- http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080703.htm
- http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/07/02/2008-0
- 7-02_dont_bomb_iran_bush_warns_israel-1.html
- http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215330891157&pagename
- http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/04/iran.threat/index.html
- http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=245597
-
|
