ISRAEL KBR AND THE CASPIAN OIL

HOW IT ALL STARTED!!

Date: Aug 8, 2008 1:46 PM

http://www. debka. com/article. php?aid=1358

Israel backs Georgia in Caspian Oil Pipeline Battle with Russia

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

August 8, 2008, 4:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

Georgian tanks and infantry, aided by Israeli military advisers, captured the capital of
breakaway South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, early Friday, Aug. 8, bringing the Georgian-
Russian conflict over the province to a military climax.

Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin threatened a “military response.”

Former Soviet Georgia called up its military reserves after Russian warplanes
bombed its new positions in the renegade province.

In Moscow’s first response to the fall of Tskhinvali, president Dimitry Medvedev

ordered the Russian army to prepare for a national emergency after calling the UN
Security Council into emergency session early Friday.

Reinforcements were rushed to the Russian “peacekeeping force” present in the

region to support the separatists.

Georgian tanks entered the capital after heavy overnight heavy aerial strikes, in
which dozens of people were killed.

Lado Gurgenidze, Georgia's prime minister, said on Friday that Georgia will continue
its military operation in South Ossetia until a "durable peace" is reached. "As soon as
a durable peace takes hold we need to move forward with dialogue and peaceful
negotiations."

DEBKAfile’s geopolitical experts note that on the surface level, the Russians are
backing the separatists of S. Ossetia and neighboring Abkhazia as payback for the
strengthening of American influence in tiny Georgia and its 4.5 million inhabitants.
However, more immediately, the conflict has been sparked by the race for control
over the pipelines carrying oil and gas out of the Caspian region.

The Russians may just bear with the pro-US Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili’s
ambition to bring his country into NATO. But they draw a heavy line against his plans
and those of Western oil companies, including Israeli firms, to route the oil routes
from Azerbaijan and the gas lines from Turkmenistan, which transit Georgia, through
Turkey instead of hooking them up to Russian pipelines.

Saakashvili need only back away from this plan for Moscow to ditch the two
provinces’ revolt against Tbilisi. As long as he sticks to his guns, South Ossetia and
Abkhazia will wage separatist wars.
DEBKAfile discloses Israel’s interest in the conflict from its exclusive military sources:

Jerusalem owns a strong interest in Caspian oil and gas pipelines reach the Turkish
terminal port of Ceyhan, rather than the Russian network. Intense negotiations are
afoot between Israel Turkey, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Azarbaijan for pipelines to
reach Turkey and thence to Israel’s oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea
port of Eilat. From there, supertankers can carry the gas and oil to the Far East
through the Indian Ocean.

Aware of Moscow’s sensitivity on the oil question, Israel offered Russia a stake in the
project but was rejected.

Last year, the Georgian president commissioned from private Israeli security firms
several hundred military advisers, estimated at up to 1,000, to train the Georgian
armed forces in commando, air, sea, armored and artillery combat tactics. They also
offer instruction on military intelligence and security for the central regime. Tbilisi
also purchased weapons, intelligence and electronic warfare systems from Israel.

These advisers were undoubtedly deeply involved in the Georgian army’s

preparations to conquer the South Ossetian capital Friday.

In recent weeks, Moscow has repeatedly demanded that Jerusalem halt its military
assistance to Georgia, finally threatening a crisis in bilateral relations. Israel
responded by saying that the only assistance rendered Tbilisi was “defensive.”

This has not gone down well in the Kremlin. Therefore, as the military crisis
intensifies in South Ossetia, Moscow may be expected to punish Israel for its
intervention.

&

http://www. scandoil. com/moxie-bm2/oil/pipelines/kbr-subsidiary-granherne-selected-for-

trans-caspia. shtml
KBR subsidiary Granherne selected for Trans Caspian Oil and Gas study

KBR says that its consulting subsidiary Granherne has been selected as the
contractor for the United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) funded
Trans Caspian Oil and Gas Study by the State Oil Company of the Republic of
Azerbaijan (SOCAR).

KBR subsidiary awarded frame agreement by StatoilHydro

KBR says that its consulting subsidiary Granherne has been selected as the
contractor for the United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) funded
Trans Caspian Oil and Gas Study by the State Oil Company of the Republic of
Azerbaijan (SOCAR).

The feasibility study will involve services for conceptual pipeline routing and design,
financial analysis and economic modeling, capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating
expenditure (OPEX) estimates, as well as marketing of products and environmental
reviews. The study will also examine the feasibility of building new pipelines to
transport oil and gas from the region to other world markets.
"Our selection demonstrates Granherne's ability to address the wide ranging scope of
the study while addressing the technical challenges," said Clive Vaughan, Managing
Director, Granherne. "We look forward to participating in the effort to bring oil and
gas from the Caspian region to other areas of the world."

Granherne Inc. was selected for the study through a competitive bidding process
involving eleven other firms. Granherne will rely on expertise from its KBR
counterparts, including its office in Baku, as well as the support of several
subcontractors. Work on the study is expected to commence in late April.

See Also--
http://www. scandoil. com/moxie-bm2/news/kbr-subsidiary-awarded-frame-agreement-by-
statoilh. shtml

&

http://www. wsws. org/news/1998/nov1998/casp-n16. shtml

New Caspian oil interests fuel US war drive against Iraq

By Barry Grey
16 November 1998

Iraq's decision to allow the resumption of UN weapons inspections has temporarily

forestalled a US attack. But the crisis is by no means resolved. It will intensify in the
coming days and weeks, under conditions in which the Clinton administration has
openly linked its preparations for an air war to the goal of destabilizing and removing
the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Powerful geo-political interests are fueling the American war drive. In many respects
US policy in the Persian Gulf is driven today by the same considerations that led it to
invade Iraq nearly eight years ago. As a "senior American official"--most likely
Secretary of State James Baker--told the New York Times within days of the Iraqi
occupation of Kuwait in August of 1990: "We are talking about oil. Got it? Oil, vital
American interests."

The Bush administration exploited Iraq's move against its southern neighbor to
demonstrate US military supremacy and strengthen its position in a region rich in oil
and strategically located at the crossroads of the Middle East, southeastern Europe,
northern Africa and Central Asia. The gulf war was intended as a warning to
American imperialism's major international rivals, above all Germany and Japan,
both of which were heavily dependent on oil imports from the region. In the midst of
the war Bush hinted as much in a speech to the New York Economic Club. In trade
talks with Germany and Japan, he said, "We will have some--I wouldn't say leverage
on them--but persuasiveness."

There have, however, been major changes since 1991, above all, the breakup of the
Soviet Union. This gigantic fact has altered geo-political relations in the Middle East,
the Persian Gulf and Central Asia, and, if anything, exacerbated American
dissatisfaction with the status quo in Iraq.

The transformation of former Soviet republics in the region into independent states--
politically unstable but endowed in some cases with enormous deposits of oil and
other mineral wealth--has led to an increasingly intense involvement of the US in
Central Asia. The lure of enormous oil reserves in the Caspian Sea has made
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan the focus of fierce competition between
the great powers of the world for domination of this part of the globe.

This struggle recalls the protracted conflict between Britain and Russia at the end of
the nineteenth century for hegemony in the Middle East and Central Asia that
became known as the Great Game. Germany made its own thrust into the region
with its decision to build the Berlin to Baghdad railroad. The resulting tensions played
a major role in the growth of European militarism that erupted in World War I.

This time American imperialism is the major protagonist. Over the past several
years, the battle for dominance in the region has come to center on one question:
where to build a pipeline to move oil from the Azeri capital of Baku to the West.

Within the next several months the Azerbaijan International Operating Company
(AIOC), a consortium of the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan and international
companies including British Petroleum and four US firms, Amoco, Unocal, Exxon and
Pennzoil, will announce a decision on pipeline construction that Washington considers
to be of immense importance to the strategic position of the United States in the
twenty-first century. French, Japanese, Russian and Chinese firms are also heavily
involved in projects for drilling and shipping oil from the Caspian.

The Clinton administration has given the highest priority to this issue. Bill
Richardson, who as American ambassador to the UN was the point man for
Washington in the last US confrontation with Iraq in the winter of 1997-98, has been
appointed Secretary of Energy. He has been assigned the lead role in convincing
AIOC to build its pipeline along an east-west route preferred by American
policymakers.

Washington wants the pipeline to pass from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey,
emptying out at the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. Oil executives have
inclined to a more direct, shorter and cheaper route that would flow south through
Iran to the Persian Gulf. A third alternative would move the oil from Baku northwest
through Russia, ending at the Black Sea port of Novorossisk.

A US State Department report from April of last year indicates the importance which
the Clinton administration attaches to the geo-politics of Caspian oil:

"The Caspian region could become the most important new player in world oil
markets over the next decade. The US has critical foreign policy issues at stake--the
increase and diversification of world energy supplies, the independence and
sovereignty of the NIS [Newly Independent States] and isolation of Iran."

A series of unusually frank articles in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the
Wall Street Journal and other more specialized organs of American bourgeois opinion
and policy have placed the battle over the pipeline decision within the context of a
struggle for world domination in the next century.

Last month the Times ran a front-page article warning that the US pipeline plan was
on the brink of defeat.The article said:

"The Caspian region has emerged as the world's newest stage for big power politics.
It not only offers oil companies the prospect of great wealth, but provides a stage for
high-stakes competition among world powers.... Much depends on the outcome,
because these pipelines will not simply carry oil but will also define new corridors of
trade and power. The nation or alliance that controls pipeline routes could hold sway
over the Caspian region for decades to come."

The Times quoted Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) lamenting that US leverage
had been weakened because Clinton had "lost the power of moral persuasion" as a
result of the scandals surrounding his administration.

Since then the Clinton administration has intensified its lobbying efforts, and the
AIOC has put off announcing its decision on the pipeline route.Indicative of
Washington's high-level efforts, the Times ran another major article on November 8,
which spoke of the pipeline decision in even more apocalyptic terms:

"At stake is far more than the fate of the complex Caspian region itself. Rivalries
being played out here will have a decisive impact in shaping the post-Communist
world, and in determining how much influence the United States will have over its
development."

The article quoted Richardson, who hinted broadly at the determination of

Washington to prevent the pipeline from running through either Iran or Russia, so as
to limit the political influence of both in the region:

"This is about America's energy security, which depends on diversifying our sources
of oil and gas worldwide. It's also about preventing strategic inroads by those who
don't share our values. We're trying to move these newly independent countries
toward the West. We would like to see them reliant on Western commercial and
political interests rather than going another way. We've made a substantial political
investment in the Caspian, and it's very important to us that both the pipeline map
and the politics come out right."

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the discovery of huge oil and gas reserves in
the Caspian have led to a certain evolution in US policy toward Iraq. As long as the
issue of strategic concern was only the Persian Gulf, the focus of American concern
was to Iraq's south. Washington concluded that a military occupation of Iraq and
possible fracturing of the country posed too great a risk of destabilizing the region. It
decided at the end of the gulf war to leave Saddam Hussein's Republican Guard
intact and allow him to remain in power.

America's intensified interest in the lands to Iraq's north has altered US military and
economic priorities. For a thrust into the Caspian, a more direct military and political
presence in Iraq is necessary.

Iraq occupies a strategic position in the geography of the region in general, and the
geo-politics of the pipeline dispute in particular. The nation that controlled the north
of Iraq would be in a position, for example, to protect a pipeline through southern
Turkey, or launch military strikes against a pipeline through Iran.

The US would like to turn northern Iraq into a new base for American military
operations. This is politically unfeasible as long as the present Iraqi regime is in
power. US policy over the past seven years has made a normalization of relations
with Saddam Hussein impossible, for both domestic and international reasons. He
has become an increasingly intolerable obstacle to American aims. He must be
eliminated and replaced by a US client regime.

It is more than just a coincidence that Washington stepped up its military

preparations against Iraq at the very point that its efforts to impose its choice of a
pipeline route for Caspian oil seemed headed for defeat. A large-scale strike against
Iraq would send a clear message to Russia, France, Iran and other rivals that the US
retains military supremacy and is prepared to use it. It would demonstrate to each
and all that American imperialism is the top gun not only in the Persian Gulf, but in
Central Asia as well.

On a wider international arena, conflicts between the US and its imperialist rivals in
Europe and Asia are intensifying over a host of economic and political issues. Just in
the last few days Clinton has threatened trade war measures against Japan over
steel and the European Union over bananas. This provides an added incentive for
using Iraq as a convenient target to remind the world of America's capacity for
military destruction.

See Also:
US moves towards air attack on Iraq
http://www. wsws. org/news/1998/nov1998/iraq-n10. shtml
[10 November 1998]
Earlier 1998 articles on Iraq
http://www. wsws. org/sections/category/news/me-iraq. shtml

And--
http://www. soros.
org/initiatives/cep/articles_publications/publications/caspianoilwindfalls_20030514
http://www. mideastinfo. com/library/cw-caspian-iran. htm
 Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Grand Chessboard

American Primacy And It's Geostrategic Imperatives

Key Quotes From Zbigniew Brzezinksi's Seminal Book

"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has
been the center of world power."- (p. xiii) (Eurasia means "the Middle East")

"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of
dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive
and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)

"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia
would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere
glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail
Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania (Australia) geopolitically
peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia,
and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its
soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)

“The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the
exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian
Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the
Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the
concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the
first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)

“Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of
power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or
challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense
spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the
effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization."
(p.35)

"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." (p. 211)
... by manipulating this "global­zone of percolating violence," which happens to be a raw­materials­
wealthy region... Brzezinski proposes to further contain and weaken Russia and China.

Bill Clinton's War
Zbigniew Brzezinski's Background
According to his resume, Zbigniew Brzezinski lists the following achievements:
Harvard Ph.D. in 1953
Counselor, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Professor of American Foreign Policy, Johns Hopkins University
National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (1977-81)
Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission
International advisor of several major US/Global corporations
Member of ACPC, American Coalition for Peace in Chechnya, a.k.a. American Committee
for Peace in the Caucasus
Associate of Henry Kissinger
Under Ronald Reagan - member of NSC-Defense Department Commission on Integrated
Long-Term Strategy
Under Ronald Reagan - member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory
Board
Past member, Board of Directors, The Council on Foreign Relations
1988 - Co-chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force.

Brzezinski is also a past attendee and presenter at several conferences of the Bilderberger
group - a non-partisan affiliation of the wealthiest and most powerful families and
corporations on the planet.

A War in the Planning for Four Years

HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?
Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CFR Put War Plans In a 1997 Book ­ 
It Is "A Blueprint for World Dictatorship," Says a Former German Defense and NATO Official, who 
warned of Global Domination in 1984.
article by Michael C. Ruppert

The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski – More Quotes

"...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 power. 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...” (p. xiii)

"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of
dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and
integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)

"The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been
much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely
because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.” (pp 24-5)

"For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia... Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent
in Eurasia - and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively
its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.” (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 prompt global anarchy." (p. 30)

"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe's largest
continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the
world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also
suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination,
rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central
continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's
physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia
accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known
energy resources." (p.31)

“It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of
America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist
democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands
popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of
domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice
(casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic
instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)

"Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states
that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power
and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely
consequences of their seeking to attain them;... second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to
offset, co-opt, and/or control the above..." (p. 40)

"...To put it in a terminology that harkens 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." (p.40)

"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional
coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's
status as a global power." (p.55)

"Uzbekistan, nationally the most vital and the most populous of the central Asian states, represents
the major obstacle to any renewed Russian control over the region. Its independence is critical to
the survival of the other Central Asian states, and it is the least vulnerable to Russian pressures." (p.
121)

[Referring to an area he calls the "Eurasian Balkans" and a 1997 map in which he has circled the exact location of the current conflict  
­   describing   it   as   the   central   region   of   pending   conflict   for   world   dominance]
"Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security
and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors,
namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the
region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize:
an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition
to important minerals, including gold." (p.124)

"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades.
Estimates by the U.S. Department of energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50
percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the
Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures
for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the
Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of
Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

"Uzbekistan is, in fact, the prime candidate for regional leadership in Central Asia." (p.130)

"Once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan's truly vast natural gas reserves augur
a prosperous future for the country's people.” (p.132)

"In fact, an Islamic revival - already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by
Saudi Arabia - is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new
nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian - and hence infidel -
control." (p. 133).

"For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in
Afghanistan - and to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan -
and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian
Sea." (p.139)

"Turkmenistan... has been actively exploring the construction of a new pipeline through
Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea..." (p.145)

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power
comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered
financial and economic access to it." (p148)

"China's growing economic presence in the region and its political stake in the area's independence
are also congruent with America's interests." (p.149)

"America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence,
what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance
to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy." (p.194)

"Without sustained and directed American involvement, before long the forces of global
disorder could come to dominate the world scene. And the possibility of such a fragmentation is
inherent in the geopolitical tensions not only of today's Eurasia but of the world more generally."
(p.194)

"With warning signs on the horizon across Europe and Asia, any successful American policy must
focus on Eurasia as a whole and be guided by a Geostrategic design." (p.197)

"That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent (preempt) the
emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy..."
(p. 198)

"The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the
capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive
arbitration role." (p. 198)

"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration
of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as
the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)

"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." (p. 211)

MORE:
The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled
society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional
values (like liberty and democracy). Soon it will be possible to assert almost
continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files
containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be
subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.
 - Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, 1970

"In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of
the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the
reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest
communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason."
- Between Two Ages : America's Role in the Technetronic Era - 1970

"This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a
gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one
world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept." ---
Zbignew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (It's not
that I'm "nationalist". It's that the Bill of Rights will fade away too.)

"What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of
the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe
and the end of the cold war?" - 1998 interview

The following statement was made more than twenty-five years ago in a book by Brzezinski which he wrote
while a professor at Columbia University:
"Political strategists are tempted to exploit research on the brain and human behavior.
Geophysicist Gordon J.F. MacDonald, a specialist in problems of warfare, says
accurately-timed, artificially-excited electronic strokes could lead to a pattern of
oscillations that produce relatively high power levels over ... in this way one could develop
a system that would certain regions of the earthseriously impair the brain performance
of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period"

" ... no matter how deeply disturbing the thought of using the environment to
manipulate behavior for national advantages, to some, the technology permitting such
use will very probably develop within the next few decades."

with credit to source: http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

Fred Burks "spiritual" talk online is as painful as getting teeth drilled, and seem weirdly psyop.
White House Insider Fred Burks Talks of Global Transformation
Fred Burks talkes about Mind Control and spreading love to kill Evil
Fred Burks first hour with Hesham Tillawi. Government secrets bizarre - to
me, anyhow, not political but airy spiritual

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to
advance understanding of criminal justice, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided
for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted
material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from
the copyright owner.

Zbigniew Brzezinski - The Grand Chessboard

MORE QUOTES: from some anti-communist sites:

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/cfr.html
http://reformed-theology.org/jbs/books/insiders/part_1.htm