The Real Grand Chessboard and the Profiteers of War, by Prof. Peter Dale Scott. – http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14672

By the strange hand of fate, Peter Dale Scott has reason to know Brzezinski’s character (or lack thereof) intimately. Once a right-wing-eastern-European-nutcase-conspirator, always a right-wing-eastern-European-nutcase-conspirator. Peter Dale Scott knew Zbigniew Brzezinski when the latter was an undergraduate student and Scott was the college Dean, in Montreal, Canada, who had to undo Brzezinski’s attempt to hijack a college society — a left wing society, naturally. But listen for yourself. -

PDS – 9. 1. 1. Truth conference, Montreal. Or from PDS’s website, at about minute 3:00 (no time counter on video, so 12% to 15% in by eyeball …). – http://www.mtl911truth.org/?p=376

Another is to keep Apartheid Israel a racist, bigoted state of madness for Jews and another is to keep that Afghan opium flowing and making Wall Street banks rich financing the trade and laundering the profits.

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ’0 which is not a hashcash value.

One more, blatant step down the road to full blown police state.

Dr. Ahmed,

All due respect but Henry Okah and MEND have been able to derail more daily oil production in the Niger delta, than Yemen produces and exports daily. By this logic the 82nd Airborne should be camped out in Port Harcourt right now.

I think your stretching by extending the peak oil meme to Yemen. The only reason Yemen is of any significance is because of its geography.

I take it you have a book on energy and geopolitics in the works? If I may ask, what primary research have you done, or hope to do for it? As far as secondary reading, I recommend you check out James R. Norman’s The Oil Card: Global Economic Warfare in the 21st Century if you have not already.

Best,
KF

Thank you for your reply and for putting me on a spot that I now seem unable to get out of. : )

With regrets, after an afternoon of fruitless combing the web, I am able to neither confirm nor deny that Obama’s first job was with Kissinger Associates. The only direct reference that I can find to it was from Alex Jone’s documentary “Obama Deception”, and the bibliography provided for that documentary omits any attribution for that claim. DRAT!

I will continue to cast around for crumbs linking Obama, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Kissinger and related power brokers, but it looks very shadowy at this point, as it seems most of Obama’s history is. I’m not hopeful. I’m open to any leads anyone wishes to provide on the subject.

Regarding your comment: “As for ‘would that surprise anyone?’: Are you kidding, of course not. ” Yeah I was kidding : ).

@zaknick in a manner of speaking, yeah.

Peace on earth,
God bless us every one
especially children and thought criminals
Dave Short

@Zaknick: We just finished interviewing Chris Hedges. I think you’ll like him a lot…

@JamesLaffrey: Now, this sounds like sibling rivalry! I read every single comment, and you know, after a while, it gets pretty redundant and boring to hear/read me saying/writing: great comment, interesting point, etc. With our Mr. KF, as I indicated above, things gets a bit under my skin, so I go on the record with that (having it under my skin;-); exercising/polishing my tolerance and patience! Maybe you try to exercise a bit maturity, and don’t make this to be a sign of favoritism. Or, try to really get under my skin, and draw a fiery-biting response;-)

@Camusrebel:’Council of Governors BO’- Now I feel ignorant, and that’s not because I rely on MSM! I have to look into that, and find out what this is about…Thank you.

Nice to hear a different perspective on things. Your post gives me the southern strategy to Pepe Escobar’s Central Asian chronicling of the “Great Game”. By the way, the motivations you impute to the US elite is spot on; I’ve read a lot of analysis on them from ex-intel folks speaking out against their genocidal ways to know that such statements ring true.

Amazing that you sit here and read and comment on this blog and you still want to keep pushing your biases and agenda.

You might be a bit right on not oversimplifying this stuff but what Sibel is saying is true; horribly so. Just ask any Iranian, Venezuelan, Chilean, Brazilian, etc. etc.

@344thBrother

OMFG

On this website, the anonymous “Kingfisher” is treated like He Who Must Be Replied To. His (or her) behavior is obvious to me. I don’t reply to him. (See above: I didn’t take his bait.)

But worth comment is the fact that Sibel seems always to reply to him but often not to significant others, and now Nafeez Ahmed has replied at length here to “the very important question” by Kingfisher.

Do you believe there are “Al-queada” terrorists in Yemen(or anywhere) not under the auspices of CIA/Mossad.

And for the record, would it be mistaken to say you are certain that 911 was an inside job.

Thanks for your amazing research, writings, fearless clear thinking and hard work.

344…I too was alarmed at the brazen openness Sunstein declared war on the truth and free speech with. Another weasle zionista desperately trying to keep the wolves from his masters door.

Sibel, have you heard about, plan to write about the Council of Governors BO announced recently to exactly zero press coverage?

I’d like to respond to the very important question about Yemen’s domestic oil and gas crisis, and what on earth this would have to do with US military intervention, given the level of depletion of Yemeni resources.

Firstly, the issue needs to be understood in its wider geostrategic context. I’ve suggested here, and argued in more detail elsewhere, that the ‘War on Terror’ needs to be understood as a strategic US elite response to the decline of US hegemony through the post-Cold War period, a decline compounded and accelerated in the context of converging global energy, ecological and economic crises. I can’t prove this claim here and now, but suffice to say that there’s a greal deal of evidence that the Bush administration was particularly concerned by the danger of a global oil supply crunch early in the twenty-first century. This has played an instrumental role in the development of the ‘War on Terror’ as a long-term strategy to (try to) dominate not only the entirety of the world’s oil and gas resources, but also all possible transhipment routes. This is not all the ‘War on Terror’ is about, but it is central. Part of the rationale is to quote Anthony Cordesman from the CSIS, “oil is power” – whoever dominates the energy reserves and transhipments routes dominates a world dependent on them. This provides a lever by which to continue to dominate the world economy as well as to dominate key US rivals, such as China, Russia, Western Europe, India, etc.

As I’ve emphasised Iraq, Afghanistan were only stages in a broader conception. Yemen and Somalia were also part of this strategy. The issue of declining energy resources may explain the chronology, in terms of, why now? Yemen is not the only country to have peaked in oil production. Saudi Arabia, for all intents and purposes, has done so. So has Iran. So has Venuezuela – i’m just plucking some examples out here. there are dozens of other major fields in decline.

The coming oil crunch is going to hit us hard. My sense is that US policy-planners see a necessity to gain control of as many extant and potential sources of hydrocarbon energy as possible – this sense is backed up by evidence such as the energy security report commissioned by Dick Cheney and published by the CFR and James Baker IPP three months before 9/11, which advocated a general need for military intervention in the Middle East (particularly in Iraq) to stave off an oil supply crunch. This includes ensuring the stability of the Yemeni supply, no matter how seemingly insignificant – any quantity of oil is hugely significant in the context of the impact of the impending peak of world oil production; and Yemen still has sufficient gas reserves to serve US markets amply for just under the next decade – from a short-term perspective, keeping such energy sources online is essential to ensure the overall flow of resources as well as to stabilise world prices, which has become particularly important after the devastating impact of the global financial crisis.

My sense is also that the US administration is concerned by the generic destabilizing impact of a coming oil supply crunch in terms of its relations with major rivals. The Yemen intervention also provides a deeper military penetration of the Persian Gulf and North Africa. Yemen’s own internal energy crises provides a trigger for the urgency of doing so, illustrating the potential for the region to spiral wildly out of control. It is critical, within the current ideological framework of policymaking in ‘international affairs’, to maintain the system against these odds, based on the unquestionable principle of US primacy/pre-eminence which cannot be allowed to decline. That means that the framework of social, political and economic order in Yemen – defined as “stability” despite its inherently self-imploding dynamic – must be sustained. This is all part and parcel of maintaining the “regional framework of order” in the Gulf, which the US itself had worked to established, and formalised in the 1970s with the Nixon-Kissinger doctrine. There you go, the Dark Lord surfaces yet again!

The urgency of sustaining the “stability” of this order, by propping up the Yemeni regime, is precisely to stave off an internal social crisis and collapse in the context of massive converging energy, economic, food and water crises that threaten to provoke popular uprisings, in turn threatening the collapse of a trusty regional client-state that could also have a spiralling regional impact in the Persian Gulf.

Abstract
“Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined.”

“What causes such theories to arise and spread? Are they important and perhaps even threatening, or merely trivial and even amusing? What can and should government do about them? We aim here to sketch some psychological and social mechanisms that produce, sustain, and spread these theories; to show that some of them are quite important and should be taken seriously; and to offer suggestions for governmental responses, both as a matter of policy and as a matter of law.”

“direct government rebuttals of the reigning
conspiracy theory will prove ineffective; government will instead do best by using various tactics of cognitive infiltration to break up the polarized information cluster from within.”

“II. Governmental Responses
What can government do about conspiracy theories? Among the things it can do,
what should it do? We can readily imagine a series of possible responses.
(1)Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such
parties, encouraging them to help. Each instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).”

“In Section C, we examine the role of law and judges in fashioning the
government’s response. We will ask whether judges do more good than harm by invoking statutes such as the Freedom of Information Act to force government to disclose facts that would rebut conspiracy theories. Our conclusions are generally skeptical: there is little reason to believe that judges can improve on administrative choices in these situations.”

Sounds like a proposal for the end of free speech to me. Is speech still free if they tax it? Oh wait, that’s a conspiracy theory.

In the interests of brevity, I’ll end it here. There’s lots more.

peace freedom truth justice.
Dave Short (Taxable thought criminal)

@KingFisher: You and I have agreed to disagree on some issues. And, yes, your initial/first comment is a good point, good question that should be expanded upon & explained further. As I’ve said before: I’d hate to see this place becoming another echo chamber of uniformed thoughts/view points…so I happen to like the idea of having you and others question certain angles, disagree, and provide alternative view points. I also appreciate your civil manners in expressing all that…Anyway, sometimes you (really) get under my skin, but please don’t let that stop you:-)

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1084585_code254274.pdf?abstractid=1084585&mirid=1

SSRN-Conspiracy Theories by Cass Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule
papers.ssrn.com

peace freedom truth justice
Dave Short (Thought Criminal) Just ask Cass

My initial post questioned Dr. Ahmed’s assertion that Yemen’s oil and gas resources and domestic energy crisis are related to the deepening of US military involvement.

Looking for confirmation here.
True or false: Obama got his first job fresh out of school under Henry Kissinger?

True or false, would that surprise anyone?

peace on earth
Dave Short (Thought criminal)

@Theepitbull: I agree; excellent, indeed. As a side note: you deserve much better sources than Raw Story- They copy-paste MSM garbage with revised title and a bit cosmeric add ups, and they happen to be marketing and selling partisan pills-Democratic HQ. That’s my two cents, and those I know with good sense for good/solid/real sources. It’s ok to visit now and then if you’re in that kinda entertainment thing, but don’t let it become your source for info…

“The U.S. is the worst international criminal bully since Hitler and Japan in WW2.”
You cannot be serious. The body count racked up under the banner of communism would make even Hitler blush.

“Nope, the U.S. has to own those resources. The U.S. has to steal those resources by force, by murder, my mass murder.”
If only that were the case! Gas is still over $2.50 a gallon in the states. I am still waiting to see some of the dividends from all this pillaging we do.

BTY

This just in: FYI

http://rawstory.com/2010/01/obama-staffer-infiltration-911-groups/

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585

In a 2008 academic paper, President Barack Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated “cognitive infiltration” of groups that advocate “conspiracy theories” like the ones surrounding 9/11.

(((3)))

If I may…
More simply:

The U.S. instigates unrest and “terror” in important oil/gas-related countries. And then the U.S. uses that “terror” as an excuse to seize control of the target countries by murdering as many citizens of those countries as necessary. Acts of “terror” both real and manufactured are enabled by the U.S. in the U.S. in order to keep the U.S. public cowering. Yemen is the latest but not the last.
___

But please notice that the U.S. doesn’t do that in important oil-gas-related countries that have the means to make the U.S. pay for such horrendous criminal behavior. The U.S. doesn’t do it to Russia, for example. No Predator drones are headed for Russia. The U.S. is the worst international criminal bully since Hitler and Japan in WW2.

Why? Well, one answer is this: Our leaders, our supposed capitalist free-marketist leaders (overt and Deep State), refuse to pay the market price for energy resources from the countries that own those resources. Nope, the U.S. has to own those resources. The U.S. has to steal those resources by force, by murder, my mass murder.

Oh, but We The People are paying. We ARE paying. We are paying dearly — with so many lives. and with a trashed economy. with trashed liberties. with a trashed Constitution.