Showing posts sorted by date for query zbigniew. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query zbigniew. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, February 21, 2010

"False Flag" Foreign Policy

America's original Foreign Policy was summed up by her Founders:

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible."
— Washington, Farewell Address (1796) [Washington’s emphasis]

I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration,…peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.
— Jefferson, First Inaugural Address (1801)

Or in a nutshell: "Businessmen make the best diplomats."

Butter wins hearts better than bombs. America's businesses bring the world a higher standard of living. America's politicians -- and the diplomats who front for them -- bring intimidation, extortion, destruction and death.

One way politicians get their way is by inflicting terror in the name of their enemies, and inviting the victims of terror to repudiate the enemy and seek security in the arms of the politicians. Pretending to be the enemy is called a "false flag" operation. It's part of a strategy called the "Strategy of Tension." The "terrorist attacks" of 9-11 brought a great deal of tension. Here is a history of American False Flag Operations.

Washington's Blog reprinted many of these operations last week on Tuesday and Friday. They're worth reprinting here too.

Forget the claims and allegations that false flag terror - governments attacking people and then blaming others in order to create animosity towards those blamed - has been used throughout history.

Governments from around the world admit they carry out false flag terror:

This essay will solely discuss government admissions to the use of false flag terror.

A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that - under orders from the chief of the Gestapo - he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.

Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.

The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950's to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.

Israel admits that an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security" (and see this)(Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred).

As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings. Official State Department documents show that - only nine months before - the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. Neither plan was carried out, but they were both discussed as serious proposals.

* Note: While the Joint Chiefs of Staff pushed for Operation Northwoods to be carried out, cooler heads prevailed; President Kennedy or his Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara apparently vetoed the plan.

The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him "to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident", thus framing the ANC for the bombing.

An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).

According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.

The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.

As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the "war on terror".

Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”

United Press International reported in June 2005:
U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.

Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers.

At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.

There are many other instances of false flag attacks used throughout history proven by the historical evidence. See this, this and this. The above are only some examples of governments admitting to using false flag terror.

You can't call it a conspiracy theory when the government itself admits it.

And this is not just ancient history:

Jimmy Carter's former National Security Adviser - Zbigniew Brzezinski - told the Senate that a terrorist act might be carried out in the U.S. and falsely blamed on Iran to justify war against that nation.

A retired 27-year CIA analyst who prepared and presented Presidential Daily Briefs and served as a high-level analyst for several presidents, would not put it past the government to "play fast and loose" with terror alerts and warnings and even events themselves in order to rally people behind the flag

If you have a couple of hours, watch this BBC program on the "false flag" operations of "Gladio," a British-American terrorist operation:

Gladio - Ringmasters 1 of 5




Gladio - Ringmasters 2 of 5





Gladio - Ringmasters 3 of 5





Gladio - Ringmasters 4 of 5






Gladio - Ringmasters 5 of 5






Gladio - Puppeteers 1 of 5






Gladio - Puppeteers 2 of 5






Gladio - Puppeteers 3 of 5






Gladio - Puppeteers 4 of 5






Gladio - Puppeteers 5 of 5






Gladio - Foot Soldiers 1 of 5






Gladio - Foot Soldiers 2 of 5






Gladio - Foot Soldiers 3 of 5






Gladio - Foot Soldiers 4 of 5






Gladio - Foot Soldiers 5 of 5





After reading these reports and watching this BBC documentary, the first question is simple: "Do you believe that the federal government has ever engaged in "false flag terrorist operations?" The obvious answer being yes, the next question is, why could 9-11 have not been a "false flag operation?" Does the federal government deserve a presumption of innocence until proven guilty, or should the government be required to prove itself innocent?



Update:
"Prosecutors on Tuesday interrogated 51 Turkish military commanders, including former Air Force and Navy chiefs, over alleged plans to destabilize the country by blowing up mosques to trigger a coup and topple the Islamic-rooted government."
-- Turkish Prosecutors Interrogate 51 Officers for False Flag Terrorism Plot

Friday, March 27, 2009

Happy Birthday, Cyrus Vance

Cyrus Vance was born this day in 1917. He died in 2002.

Nobody under 40 remembers who Cyrus Vance was. He was Secretary of State under President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1980.

Hamilton Jordan was credited with devising the strategy that led to Carter's November 1976 victory. Early in the campaign, Jordan stated:

If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then I would say we failed. And I would quit. You're going to see new faces and new ideas.

Why did Jordan single out Cyrus Vance as someone that Carter would never, ever appoint as Secretary of State?

Because Jordan was painting a picture of Carter as an "outsider," and Vance was your typical "Insider." Jordan wanted American voters to believe that Jimmy Carter had the vision and the courage to "clean house," bring change to America, repudiate the plans of the "Insiders" and take America in a New Direction.

Incredibly, some Americans still believe such campaign promises.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

No Change, No Matter What

Part of Al Gore's announcement of his endorsement of Barack Obama is Gore's statement that

Over the next four years, we are going to face many difficult challenges -- including
• bringing our troops home from Iraq,
• fixing our economy, and
• solving the climate crisis.
Barack Obama is clearly the candidate best able to solve these problems and bring change to America.

"Change?"

What change?

No Change in Iraq

There will be no change in the "war on terrorism." McCain And Obama Are No Different On Iraq, neither will remove U.S. permanent bases in Iraq, and there will be no change from the interventionist, global hegemony-seeking foreign policy of the Bush-Clinton regime. There is every reason to believe that Obama will intervene to expand "democracy" into Africa.

Zbigniew Brzezinski was the foreign policy adviser for John McCain's presidential campaign in 1999-2000. Brzezinski is one of the most instrumental members of the Council on Foreign Relations and a founding member of the Trilateral Commission. Now Brzezinski is Obama's Adviser. Nothing has changed, nothing will change.

Brzezinski’s unconvincing antiwar posturing

In his 1979 memoir, With No Apologies, Senator Barry Goldwater noted:

When a new President comes on board, there is a great turnover in personnel but no change in policy. Example: During the Nixon years Henry Kissinger, CFR member and Nelson Rockefeller’s protégé, was in charge of foreign policy. When Jimmy Carter was elected, Kissinger was replaced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, CFR member and David Rockefeller’s protégé.

No Change in the Economy

Ron Paul would have brought real change to the economy, by ending the government's Inflation Tax and The Debt Bubble that has already dragged us into a recession, and will eventually lead to an even Greater Depression. This change would come about by abolishing the unconstitutional Federal Reserve.

Both Obama's advisors and McCain's advisors are Keynesians, followers of John Maynard Keynes, who said the government can bring prosperity by manipulating a nation's currency and credit and redistributing a nation's wealth from the People to the government. President Richard Nixon was one of the first in Washington D.C. to admit the decades-old fact that "We are all Keynesians now." President Obama and/or President McCain will carry on Richard Nixon's Keynesian legacy. There will be no change: that you can believe in.

No Change in Climate

Both Obama and McCain believe the mythology of global warming, and even if their plans are completely implemented, and we only drive our cars every third day and only use our refrigerators and air conditioners on the weekends, and a hundred million Americans lose their jobs, and a billion people around the world are permanently consigned to bitter poverty, and another billion of earth's human beings die outright, global temperature will only be affected by decimal fractions of one degree. It's All Cost, No Benefit, and no change: that you can believe in.

Neither Obama nor McCain are "able to solve these problems." The federal government can only cause problems. Every dollar the government confiscates, whether directly or through the inflation tax, distorts the Free Market, and moves us further from the solution. The only way things will change is if we understand that government is not the Messiah, Washington D.C. is not our Savior, and that politicians are the problem, not the solution.

From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.
-- President Ronald Reagan, First Inaugural Address

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Obama's Big Changes

Jimmy Carter was supposed to be the ultimate "outsider." The man popularly credited with devising the strategy that landed Jimmy Carter in the White House is Hamilton Jordan. A few weeks prior to the November 1976 election, he stated:

If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then I would say we failed. And I would quit. You're going to see new faces and new ideas.

After the election, Mr. Carter promptly named Cyrus Vance to be his Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski to be the head of National Security, exactly what Mr. Jordan had said would never happen. But the real question is: What is it about Mr. Vance and Mr. Brzezinski that prompted Jordan to make such a statement? And the answer is that these two men are pillars of the very Establishment that candidate Carter so often attacked.

Barack Obama's campaign slogan is "CHANGE."

Nothing will change.

The Washington Post published "A list of the national security and foreign policy advisers to the leading presidential candidates from both parties."

Here are Obama's "new faces," according to the Post:

Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s national security adviser and now a Center for Strategic and International Studies counselor and trustee and frequent guest on PBS’s NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, foreign policy adviser

Richard A. Clarke, President Clinton and President George W. Bush’s counterterrorism czar and now head of Good Harbor Consulting and an ABC News contributor, sometimes Obama adviser

Former Amb. Jeffrey Bader, President Clinton’s National Security Council Asia specialist and now head of Brookings’s China center, national security adviser

Mark Brzezinski, President Clinton’s National Security Council Southeast Europe specialist and now a partner at law firm McGuireWoods, national security adviser

Gregory B. Craig, State Department director of policy planning under President Clinton and now a partner at law firm Williams & Connolly, foreign policy adviser

Roger W. Cressey, former National Security Council counterterrorism staffer and now Good Harbor Consulting president and NBC News consultant, has advised Obama but says not exclusive

Ivo H. Daalder, National Security Council director for European affairs during President Clinton’s administration and now a Brookings senior fellow, foreign policy adviser

Richard Danzig, President Clinton’s Navy secretary and now a Center for Strategic and International Analysis fellow, national security adviser

Philip H. Gordon, President Clinton’s National Security Council staffer for Europe and now a Brookings senior fellow, national security adviser

Maj. Gen. J. (Jonathan) Scott Gration, a 32-year Air Force veteran and now CEO of Africa anti-poverty effort Millennium Villages, national security adviser and surrogate

Lawrence J. Korb, assistant secretary of defense from 1981-1985 and now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, informal foreign policy adviser

W. Anthony Lake, President Clinton’s national security adviser and now a professor at Georgetown’s school of foreign service, foreign policy adviser

James M. Ludes, former defense and foreign policy adviser to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and now executive director of the American Security Project, national security adviser

Robert Malley, President Clinton’s Middle East envoy and now International Crisis Group’s Middle East and North Africa program director, national security adviser

Gen. Merrill A. ("Tony") McPeak, former Air Force chief of staff and now a business consultant, national security adviser

Denis McDonough, Center for American Progress senior fellow and former policy adviser to then-Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle, foreign policy coordinator

Samantha Power, Harvard-based human rights scholar and Pulitzer Prize winning writer, foreign policy adviser

Susan E. Rice, President Clinton’s Africa specialist at the State Department and National Security Council and now a Brookings senior fellow, foreign policy adviser

Bruce O. Riedel, former CIA officer and National Security Council staffer for Near East and Asian affairs and now a Brookings senior fellow, national security adviser

Dennis B. Ross, President Clinton’s Middle East negotiator and now a Washington Institute for Near East Policy fellow, Middle East adviser

Sarah Sewall, deputy assistant secretary of defense for peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance during President Clinton’s administration and now director of Harvard’s Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, national security adviser

Daniel B. Shapiro, National Security Council director for legislative affairs during President Clinton’s administration and now a lobbyist with Timmons & Company, Middle East adviser

Mona Sutphen, former aide to President Clinton’s National Security adviser Samuel R. Berger and to United Nations ambassador Bill Richardson and now managing director of business consultancy Stonebridge, national security adviser


Any Democrat who feels that there is a big difference between Obama and Hillary is deceived. Obama is Clinton II.

Is there a big difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, when measured by the advisors of the Republican candidates? Not at all. The list of candidate wonks for both parties is a veritable "Who's Who" of "the Eastern Liberal Establishment." Notice that many are advisors to Presidents of both parties.

Consider one well-known advisor. I'll not reveal which one just yet, or which party.

This advisor was asked about the fact that Osama bin Laden was our construct, a genuine US baby. He got his training under our CIA when they were conducting covert operations against the USSR via the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan. This advisor, who advocated the arming of Osama, was asked if he did not now regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism and given arms and advice to future terrorists. (Keep in mind that this interview was more than two years before the Sept. 11 attacks).

The interviewee answered, "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 the Soviets crossed the border [into Afghanistan] I wrote to [the] President...: ‘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."

The interviewer responded: "And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Interviewee : "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?"

So who is this obvious right-wing fanatic anti-communist cold-warrior, blinded to long-term consequences by short-sighted conservative ideology?

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's and now Obama's national security advisor.

When they are out of power, these "establishment" advisors criticize the policies of those in power, even though the policies are identical to those advocated and implemented when the critics were in power. Then the parties change, those out of power once again assume the reigns of power, and those who were in power now criticize those in office for policies identical to the ones implemented while in power. The public criticisms are all for the benefit of gullible voters. The press loves it.

Carroll Quigley, Georgetown Professor and mentor of Bill Clinton, described political reality in these words:

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.... But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.